Quote: arliebird "senior is a class signing on and off the field no doubts about it, agree that signing british players is better then having alot more overseas boys. i would of kept chan, ohara and hep cahill for deffo but not sure on martin still decent but getting on and a overseas player that could potentailly struggle to get game time. saun briscoe is an out and out fullback played a few games on the wing when he was younger but lost some of his pace now hes a solid reliable fullback but you have a better player in tansey.'" I'm sure some Hull fans still have a soft spot for Keith Senior. Senior lying to Tony Smith, Leeds Doc and Physio that he was fit to play in the Challenge Cup, played right into Hulls hands. Remember what Senior got up to when he was on international duty down under, before getting stuffed on the pitch by the Australians. www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... 893196.ece We have already got our hands full with Tansey, fingers crossed we don't sign that donkey Cockayne as well.

Quote: arliebird "senior is a class signing on and off the field no doubts about it, agree that signing british players is better then having alot more overseas boys. i would of kept chan, ohara and hep cahill for deffo but not sure on martin still decent but getting on and a overseas player that could potentailly struggle to get game time. saun briscoe is an out and out fullback played a few games on the wing when he was younger but lost some of his pace now hes a solid reliable fullback but you have a better player in tansey.'" I'm sure some Hull fans still have a soft spot for Keith Senior. Senior lying to Tony Smith, Leeds Doc and Physio that he was fit to play in the Challenge Cup, played right into Hulls hands. Remember what Senior got up to when he was on international duty down under, before getting stuffed on the pitch by the Australians. www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... 893196.ece We have already got our hands full with Tansey, fingers crossed we don't sign that donkey Cockayne as well.

tim smith is quite a talented individual did ok at wigan till got injured would certainly be a good signing for the crusaders, as for him playing 2nd grade well thats why i mentioned him really but i still feel smith would be a good signing and would be up there in super league with the better halfbacks. the crusaders need another out and out halfback obviously witts here for the long term but i dont think him and hanbury is good enough if the cru want to improve and i think a partnership of witt and tim smith would be pretty good.

Yes. Mellars isn't hardly the player he was last season. Our halves combination next season is going to be Hanbury and Witt. I'm more than happy with that. We have missed Hanbury a lot.

When we played Wire, we were brilliant in the first half and as soon as Hanbury got injured, we lost our shape and him as a player dearly.

Witt is a good player, but he needs someone with quality at half-back with him to help him to shine. Many look to Witt to provide most things and this season, mostly he's struggled under that pressure. He another player hasn't been as good this season, but I know he can get a lot better and he will do.

Mellars had an injury early on and has played most of the season on the wing. He has been back at centre for the last few games and is starting to improve.

Should be in championship next year!

Maybe, but I doubt it.

Josh, I think you should aim your anger at the RFL and those that promised the RFL a stadium and didn't produce it.

It is these people that enabled us to get in whilst not being too great ourselves. You did a lot of our work for us.

There was a notable silence from Wakefield fans when the previous licences were handed out. Where were the online petitions, the fans threatening to walk away from the game when Widnes missed out and Wakey got another three years in Super League?
One thing I'm really struggling to understand is the constant sniping about the crowds in London and at Crusaders by certain supporters. There's a new thread on the subject minutes after either of them play at home. These very same moaners, throwing their keyboards or pints (happens in the real world too) in the air are the first to bemoan the fact that our great game has become a circus where events off the field are more important than those on it. So which is it? If the performances and results out there on the pitch are all that should count why would any reasonable person constantly bleat about the crowds of another club as a reason for them to lose their licence?

I know it may seem like the end of the world but it's a chance to regroup and rebuild, replacing shaky foundations with strong ones able to support the roots of a bright future, full of possibilities

There is a huge difference in being relegated from superleague and not being admitted in to superleague. The fact remains onfield performances count for nothing with the franchising system how can that be right. It is the RFL that have created the so called "sniping" between supporters.

I'm a little confused. Which club are you talking about here? Are you trying to suggest that Crusaders' foundations are stronger than Trinity's? If so, can you explain further how you come to such a conclusion?

Edited for you.

Whichever club loses its Super League licence.


No, I'm not.

OK, fairy snuff.

IMO the building blocks for Wakefield's regeneration are already in place with the take-over of the new regime. A drop to the championship would only delay growth by 3 or more years. Income streams have vastly increased in the last 6 months and much of the infrastructure of the club would have to be dismantled or drastically down-sized with a shrinking of the business. In many aspects of the criteria Trinity have set standards for SL, in particular the community work, but also in youth development. Clearly the stadium is not yet 100% confirmed, due to PI, and this is seen as the biggest weakness, although alternative plans are in place. The danger is that, if there is no route back, all those positives will be lost.

For Crusaders, the question is whether they would survive a spell in the lower division. Would the backers stick with it? Is it financially viable? I would say they were promoted to SL a franchise too early, but going back would be difficult step. I lived in South Wales for 10 years and was involved with some junior development there and I could see the potential for RL. I'm not so sure about Wrexham. The availability of sufficient funding would be my main concern for the success of a Welsh franchise. I would like to see it succeed, but there have been so many false dawns over the last 100 years, most recently with South Wales RL. It needs to be done properly with a long-term strategy and funding.

In short, a drop would so neither club any favours. Wakefield would survive because of those strong foundations, but their development would be severely damaged. Crusaders, who knows? but then again, IMO, their continuation in SL is still a fairly big gamble.

You obviously know more about the Wakefield situation than me and that is a good well thought out post. For what it's worth I don't think Crusaders will remain as they are, whether that means moving from Wrexham or disappearing I'm not sure. I'm keeping my eye on the Scorpions as I agree with what you say about the potential and organic development taking place down there as we speak.

rlRFL’s tough licence stance will remove immunity against expulsionrl

The Rugby Football League will warn clubs awarded a Super League licence tomorrow that they risk having it revoked on an annual basis if they do not achieve higher standards.
Whereas the first round of licence agreements saw clubs enjoy a three-year period of safety, the Yorkshire Post understands the governing body are keen to get tough with those who are showing little sign of progression.