Because there may be a better way, hence me saying If the SC rules were rejigged to better benefit the heartland clubs i would be in favour of it. I have no affiliation to the current system, if it can be changed for something better then we should do it.. Personally I thought that was a fairly self-explanatory sentence.

It isnt their competition. It doesnt belong to them. At some point you really have to get over your delusions of ownership. Northampton have as much right to compete in the championships as Leigh, the competition isnt yours and Northampton arent some interlopers.

Why should anybody accept a competition which advantages some clubs and disproportionately disadvantages other clubs? Where is the integrity in a competition which has rules which stop some clubs being able to build the squads some other clubs can? A competition which favours some clubs over other is already damaged, thats what we have at the moment, a competition where the heartland clubs have the odds stacked in their favour.

As I said earlier , you had to be there to see the reality of the situation

Did we ? , when was that then ?

They took a chance , but unfortunatley believed their own propaganda

Crowds are not the only measure no , but they are normally the biggest actual revenue stream outside the SKY money and without that money any club is living on borrwed time

Well considering they currently dont exist , it isn't about changing , more about how they start , they aren't going to be competing in the same player pool are they , otherwise what would be the point of them , as surely the main point is they will expand the player pool , or so you keep telling us

Whatever made you think we were discussing SL quality players , Northampton dont need SL quality players to compete in the Championships

There might be a better way , so away you go , explain this better way ?

So once again , explain your subjective totally fair system ? , for it to be fair where does any club have to finish within the league structure ?

No, Crusaders were a disaster waiting to happen from a number of standpoints and could only have "worked" if Samuel had been much richer and much more honest. It was a known that he was neither.



The difference is that Widnes lost a dodgy backer, had a difficult period and then get a white knight. Most SL clubs would always be rescued by somebody. Crusaders were always Samuel's personal toy and when he lost interest nobody else rich cared enough.

Cru probably didn't need to be self-sustaining but they should have been closer to it than they were.



This is BS. It is not a question of being wise after the event, it was completely predictable that he would act as he did. He had done so before.

Crusaders probably would be a "strong" team today if Samuel had been willing and able to lose a couple of million a year, but he wasn't and so this meaningless.

The point of the salary cap is to prevent clubs bankrupting themselves. Expansion clubs typically have smaller incomes than trad clubs. How does it make sense to take away the financial protection from those sides who need it most?

Where have I suggested anything to the contrary? My point was that none of the issues raised in the OP had anything to do with the failure of Crusaders, and you appear to have agreed with this 100%. It was not 'completely predictable' that Samuel would walk away, I can't recall a single person raising that issue at the time and unless you are claiming that you have the ability to see into the future then there's absolutely no way you can suggest that you knew Samuel would pull out for certain. If it was 'completely predictable' from the start, then the RFL clearly would not have allowed Crusaders into Super League. Suggesting that they should have been 'more self-sustaining' is just ridiculous, it wouldn't have made any difference as your post implies. Virtually all clubs rely on backers, and virtually all clubs would go the way of the Crusaders if their backers pulled out.

FWIW, Crusaders were rescued, you must have missed the two seasons they spent in Wrexham? Unfortunaltely for them, the new owners were just as bad as Samuel. But again, at the time there was no way of knowing that.