It's been a funny old month.

Admittedly, for most of it I was on holiday in France. And while I was away, London burned, Manchester was looted, Cas lost a Challenge Cup semi … and the RFL announced the 13 clubs who would be joining Widnes in Super League for the 2012-14 licence period.

And while a cynic might say the first three events contained no great surprises, the licence announcement certainly raised eyebrows across the rugby league world.

Because no-one – absolutely no-one – predicted before the announcement that it would be Crusaders, Super League's sole outpost in Wales, which would be the club to stand down from the current 14 SL licence holders.

Even many of those watching the announcement live assumed RFL chairman Richard Lewis had made a mistake when he went straight from "Catalan Dragons" to "Harlequins RL" when reading out the names of successful bidders.

But no, Crusaders had withdrawn their application after the 11th hour, after the RFL assessment process suggested their business case was not up to the mark.

Perhaps no-one was more surprised by that than the Crusaders players, who found out only minutes before Lewis's announcement, even though the club's owners had recorded TV interviews on the matter the night before (and then apparently gone on holiday).

Understandably they - and players who'd signed to play for Crusaders in Super League next year, particularly Keith Senior – were outraged and fully expressed that outrage in social media such as Twitter.

Nor were they alone. Social media, blogs, RLFans and other forums and the rugby league media were abuzz with comment - much of it along the lines of "this proves iicensing is a farce, the RFL should resign".

There were even calls for an inquiry.

But now the dust has settled, most Crusaders players have found other clubs for next year (helped by quota rule exemptions) and the club itself has announced that it will apply to play in the Championship next year, still at the Racecourse ground, hopefully under new ownership and possibly with fans directly represented on the board.

So let's take a look at what it all means. Rather than showing licensing to be inherently wrong, you can quite easily make the argument that the Crusaders saga does the exact opposite; that it's evidence of the system working as its supposed to.

Confirming the Crusaders' withdrawal on 26 July, Richard Lewis said: "“As part of the on-going scrutiny applied by the thoroughness of the licensing process Crusaders decided to withdraw their licence application.”

So - the licence process is supposed to scrutinise and assess all aspects of clubs seeking a place in the professional league and check that they're up to it. And that's what seems to have happened here.

Some, of course, are arguing that the weaknesses of the club should have been evident when the first licences were handed out in 2007 and Crusaders should never have been in Super League in 2008-11.

I've no particular love of hindsight – which is always 20-20 – or of the glow some people get from saying "I told you so" when things go wrong. Though, for what it's worth, I do recall saying when licensing was first mooted in 2005 that Crusaders' stated ambition to go from NL2 (as was) to Super League in three years was, at best, "ambitious".

Of course, sometimes ambition is good. Other times it can be "vaulting ambition, which o'er-leaps itself" and pretty much guarantees a fall, as Macbeth found out.

But more importantly, Crusaders do not seem to have been blessed with particularly good owners or finances. But that - and relying on financial promises which don't necessarliy pan out – is scarcely unique to them, or to expansion clubs or new clubs. Just ask the fans of Widnes and Wakefield, who've experienced their own roller coaster rides courtesy of previous owners.

Financial stability and security among all clubs – but especially in the full-time professional top flight – is something the sport's governing body needs to try and ensure.

And that is exactly one of the things the licensing system is designed to help. Crusaders' withdrawal of their SL license bid in favour of more realistic ambitions as a semi-professional clubs suggests it might even be doing that.

****

Speaking of fans on the board – interesting news from Hunslet where the Hawks could joint fellow Leeds team Bramley Buffaloes as a fan-owned and run outfit.

Chairman Graham Liles is stepping down after 32 years and he – along with fellow shareholder Sean Cluderay – has offered his holding in the club to the Hunslet Independent Supporters Trust.

If the trust accepts the shares (they have a meeting at the South Leeds Stadium tonight to decide that), it will become the majority shareholder.

***

Which brings us to this weekend and the small matter of the Challenge Cup Final at Wembley.

Wigan have been going strong since overcoming derby rivals St Helens in the semis, while Leeds have had a more uneven preparation since narrowly beating Cas in golden-point extra time.

They trounced the Tigers in their next league game, but then lost to Harlequins last weekend.

Part of me, as a Cas fan, is wondering whether there's any way both Leeds and Wigan could lose. The more noble part of me, as a rugby league fan, is hoping for a classic game (even if the weather looks less than promising).

There seems to be a consensus among fans and pundits alike that Wigan are odds-on favourites to lift the Cup.

But then they said that in 1996 as well. And a month ago, everybody was convinced that Wakefield would be the Super League club making way for Widnes while Crusaders were safe as houses.

A lot can happen in 48 hours ...