Complete nonsense. Could you put some factual evidence on this or are you just trying to create a reaction.



Doubt it was little to do with the JJB contract more to do with increased revenues in general and reduced costs and signing of new long term lease at the JJB.



Since the last bid Widnes have been performing on the pitch to a lower standard that is part of the licensing guidelines and thus part of their bid. The only thing that stopped Widnes before was financial irregularities with the previous application they had new owner that placed guarantees so in reality at the time of the current bid it was at best no better than the reality of the previous bid. Simple case the RFL did not want to take a risk on Widnes.



It is not against licence rules since there are no real rules. Crusaders were in a far worse position financially, changed club name halfway through their licence, changed location and performed worse on the pitch than Wakefield yet they were going to get a licence.



What evidence is there that Halifax will have a SL quality squad for next season?



What has it got to do with RL fans? Are the fans making and financing the bids? Bids are between the RFL and the clubs you can ask the clubs for the details of their bids not the responsibility of the RFL to divulge confidential information. The RFL clearly adjust/ignore the conditions to suit the vision they have for the ESL, months ago they all but guaranteed Harlequins a licence without the bid being submitted for all they knew they could have been on the verge of collapse.

Yes, Halifax went bust whilst in super league, not because we got relegated.

And just who was it that was overseeing this shambolic period in our history.....................

Are you worried about the future of our game now?

Workington's situation was entirely different to any of the others. You probably won't believe it, but we were actually solvent while in SL as the accounts of the time show.

The thing that did for Town was that we had players on 2-3 year contracts on SL sized wages. After we were relegated (sacrificed for Paris) we were stuck with these contracts with no income to pay them.

There were no 'null and void' clauses following relegation then, nor were there any parachute payments. Of the debt that took Town under, more than 80% of it was for future contract liabilities to players. Unlike clubs who were relegated later, we were not allowed to walk away from those contracts. We were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

After this happened to Town, and then at a lesser extent Oldham, the RFL moved to bring in things to prevent it such as making SL playing contracts void if a club was relegated and instigating parachute payments for a while.

Sorry to split hairs but Paul Mansson didn't play for us in 06. He left the season before we got promoted and I know we didn't go for broke that season as Hudgell himself told me that promotion would damage the club and would be much better the next year.

Now now Derwent , dont you go pointing out the truth

Thing is every team says that, at the end of the day a season in SL set the team back years.

Yes because at that time the people in charge did not consider the possibility of something going wrong , something it seems the current administration also dont ever seem to consider , how many times do ' loopholes ' appear that should have been considered , and then the RFL and the sport end up with egg on their faces again

My inquiry about the make up of the Championships next season is an example , we have teams playing in Championship 1 , with 5/6 games left not knowing how many if any propmotion places are up for grabs , it is quite ridiculous

I know and thats why I said went bust and were relegated not went bust due to being relegated.

So at least you got one right

By the same logic you should be in favour of franchising because it does allow teams to plan or are you saying that being allowed to plan should only be for the teams in the championship? I agree that it's silly with teams not knowing how many places are available however I also believe the three year franchising plan has been a step in the right direction. I would go a step further though and seek to extend that three years to four with a view to making it five years.