How do you know? And will you still think the same if/when we are no longer in SL, and teams with far worse applications are kept?

We are just going to have to wait until to July to find out for definite but to me it looks like we are heading for a spell in the championship.

I don't think they are a 'subsidiary' of the rugby union club - from what I can gather they are an independat organisation who work in partnership with the RU side and are 100% independantly owned. Fair enough they are reliant on the union side for their facilities - but is this much different from any one of the clubs who share a football ground?

For what its worth, I think they have probably messed up with the tie in with the rugby union side - think they would have been better off trying to convert non rugby fans rather than tap into the posh city boys, but I dont know enough about the local area to know where best for them, but I do think they are worht their slot in the league. They have made mistakes in the past and look to have made some bad decisions (just some other sides, us included) - but to single them out over any other club isn't fair I don't think.

No what I'm saying is that if they were not in SL and applied they wouldn't get in as I don't think they would average attendances anywhere near 2,500. I think we would.

Thus I don't think they would hit the one million turnover mark. I think we would, just.

You could argue that we should as we are in the heartland and London are not. However as I say after 30 years I'd like to know when that is no longer a valid excuse?

So by my reckoning if they left SL they would never get back in. Where as we with a new ground might, we will certainly make the criteria. That for me does not offer much validation for RL in London.

In what way, where is your evidence I just don't get your desire to prove your own club wrong without a fight. Are you on a mission. As I said and unlike you I'm not claiming I'm right I'm just asking fair and REASONABLE questions, what do you find so wrong with that. I'm sorry but I don't consider London a sacred cow, I also have no probs with Widnes replacing us IF we are the weakest club - like many I not convinced we are. I think London is, I'm a positive thinker, I'm a heretic burn me.

So for your benefit and without semantics let's try again.

A. Did you not fancy that one
B. A given as I said.
C. No, why are their finances better, I'm not kidding are you. Now that going into admin doesn't count on the criteria we are probably the only debt free club in the comp. Do you really think they are.
D. Same as above, we are either a new club or we are not - you can't have it both ways. In which case we can have done nothing wrong.
E. The best time to judge that is at the end of the season, but then RL in contrast to all other sports doesn't work like that. You're only as good as your last game in most sports, except in RL where it's your last season/seasons or how many bars and toilets you have.

It would have been a shame if Catalans had been relegated in their first 2 seasons for finishing bottom. They've certainly added to the competition since then (as well as providing an excellent holiday venue for rugby league fans, but that's just by the way).

Some projects take longer to mature than others. The first Welsh rugby league teams could have been a success, with the right kind of support at the time. Perhaps this one deserves a little longer?

Likewise London. No one can seriously suggest that this has been a stable club (in the sense of a single club) over the last 30 years, and should be judged on that basis? The Harlequins club faces obstacles that other clubs don't. I think it's good that they are in SL.

I love Trinity and think, given the present conditions at the club, that we deserve to be in SL too.

That's my opinion.

Furry muff, misunderstood your point.

I dont have a desire to prove our club wrong at all, I want us to be in the top flight and to have as much sucess as possible. Like most on here I spend loads of cash and time on Trinity so dont want them to fail at anything. Doesn't mean I have to think the sun shines out of the clubs and doesn't mean they are imune from criticism - especially when people continually want to slag off other clubs that I think have "better" (for want of a better word) credentials than us. I don't consider London to be a "Sacred cow", but like you and Widnes I dont have a problem with a club getting in infront of us if on merit. Anyway, back to the point in hand:

a. As I said, I don't know the first thing about Quins RL's community department - and I would be very suprised if you did too, although I am happy for your to set me straight on that if you like. I knows our's is pretty good and has won awards, but it's impossible for me to say how they compare to ours and who's is best and unlike you if I don't know something I tend to either admit it or keep schdum.

b - we agree on this

c & d - where did I say anything about us being a new club or not? For the record, when you suggest we are better of financially and management wise are you talking about us pre or post administration, that will help me discuss it with you.

e - I think we both agree on this one, but since when was your place in the top flight ever decided on your last game? Relegation has always been judged on your performance over a period of time hasn't it?

A lot of great points made on this thread, but it all boils down to this one question that no one can give a reasonable answer to;

[iWhy should Wakefield Trinity accept been kicked out of Super league when we are clearly not the weakest franchise???[/i

Why should we, when the clubs signed up to this system several years ago was not said that the best 14 clubs would be awarded a franchise? A fair system we were told, the current system is anything but fair. It's promotion and relegation by choice! the criteria is that vague that you could pick who you want in SL, justify it by putting certain weight on anything really, eg Widnes youth development rather than Fax winning the actual competition.

If I was Glover I'd been consulting with the solicitors and making a case for the courts to decide.

Answer - because there is absolutely nothing we can do about it.

No case. I seem to remember that they have introduced some kind of general discretion clause, where they look at what the club brings to the league or something. By importing a personal judgement rather than a pure points comparison, they can do what they want.

In relation to those people who stay away as a protest, one I understand, isn't there an argument that you make it worse for Wakey. One of the arguments against the expansion clubs is that they add nothing to the matchday experience as they don't bring any fans, if we don't take any to them, we lose the argument. An empty away stand will look pretty bad.