Doncaster, whilst not a heartland side, is comfortably in commuting distance for a huge part of the heartland player pool. Northampton isnt.

It's no wonder RL fans in general are known as working class numpties.. RB it really isn't hard to understand; Starbug's lost it with old age don't follow him down the path of the deluded side.

At Doncaster players only get paid if they play. They are not selected if they do not fully commit to training.
Much of our training is at Lindholme which is not in central Doncaster.
I work in Leeds and a couple of my colleagues are from Cas/Wakey and have told me on more than one occasion of personal friends who were offered a deal with the Dons but turned them down because after their travelling expenses for training would be virtually playing for nothing.
We are not an expansion team though so it's ok.

Is it the salary cap which is preventing Doncaster paying any more in Wages? If so then its clear the SC is set at the wrong level. If not then your point isnt relevant.

Regardless of what the cap is we can only pay what we can afford in order to stay in the black. What i am saying is that although not in an expansion area we still struggle with attracting players from any distance.

But thats because you dont have any money. Im not advocating giving Northampton extra money, simply allowing them to spend a bit more, if they have it, to balance out the additional cost to players should they sign for Northampton above other, heartland clubs.

Do you really think that is fair?

I admit i do not know the details of what we are, or are not spending at Donny in relation to the cap, we only spend an affordable amount. But i know we are only allowed to spend the same as Rochdale or Oldham for example who have a bigger pool of players to pick from in their locality

Either what you are spending is limited by the SC, or it is limited by your own finances. Its one or the other.

So you agree that their failure was due to the owner and not any of the points raised in the OP.

I wasn't suggesting that it was exactly the same situation at Wakefield, my point was that the same would happen to any club if the backer pulled out. If Davy pulled out of Huddersfield, O'Connor pulled out of Widnes etc they would go the same way as the Crusaders did, virtually no clubs are self-sustainable and so to expect that Celtic Crusaders should have been before they were allowed entry isn't really fair. Maybe the RFL should have been more dilligent regarding Samuel, but there was no way they could have known that he would do what he did, at the time it appeared that he was completely committed to the club. And if he had remained committed, I'm pretty sure Celtic Crusaders would be a relatively strong SL club today. The same goes for the club when they were based in Wrexham.

So if they then finish in the top 2/3 , has your subjective ' allowance been fair ? , or if they finish in the bottom 2/3 , have you been unfair ?

So you are advocating the RFL funding players wages for selective clubs , as they did for the Celtic Crusaders