Wakey , Cas , Bradford , Hull Kr , Leeds all have well below Standards Stadia !
So how long will SL still allow these teams to keep saying next year and not making the improvement required !
It seems to be one rule for one and another for others or is it they're all Yorkshire clubs ?

Headingley Stadium meets all the standards required. HTH

Leeds have three stands, two seated, and comply with the current SL criteria. Wakey and Cas are trying to get new Stadia. If Bradford had a rich benefactor it could be the best ground in Superleague, maybe the RFL will help them.
HKR have the land to extend/rebuild the stadium.

Some of us have been lucky in that supermarkets etc have helped sway decisions on new stadia build.

Leeds have one stand that's new and up to standard rest of its out of the Ark and needs ripping out and replacing them and all the others keep saying we've got a stadium in the pipeline but it hasn't appeared ! Even Salford have built one ! They're probably the bench mark for the lower funded clubs and if they've done it I personally would expect or should I say demand all the non complying Yorkshire clubs get new stadia or make way for someone who will !
Leeds are a disgrace when it comes to the Stadium with their success and money they don't have anywhere to hide !

Bitter much?

And where do you think they are going to get the money from?
All the other clubs have moved to new purpose built stadia partially if not wholly funded by others.

PADDERS wrote:Wakey , Cas , Bradford , Hull Kr , Leeds all have well below Standards Stadia ! So how long will SL still allow these teams to keep saying next year and not making the improvement required ! It seems to be one rule for one and another for others or is it they're all Yorkshire clubs ? Can I suggest you have a read of this: http://www.superleague.co.uk/page/licensing/375 and perhaps do a bit of research to help with your ranting! Leeds are a Grade A club and have further stadium improvements planned to a ground that whilst not being brand new is perfectly adequate. Bradford and Hull KR are Grade B and the latter has just started ground improvements. Cas and Wakefield are both Grade C and indeed both must face the challenge of their stadium situations in the current licencing period. Had Crusaders not folded, it's likely Wakefield would have gone last time round. What exactly is your problem?

PADDERS wrote:Wakey , Cas , Bradford , Hull Kr , Leeds all have well below Standards Stadia ! So how long will SL still allow these teams to keep saying next year and not making the improvement required ! It seems to be one rule for one and another for others or is it they're all Yorkshire clubs ? Can I suggest you have a read of this: http://www.superleague.co.uk/page/licensing/375 and perhaps do a bit of research to help with your ranting! Leeds are a Grade A club and have further stadium improvements planned to a ground that whilst not being brand new is perfectly adequate. Bradford and Hull KR are Grade B and the latter has just started ground improvements. Cas and Wakefield are both Grade C and indeed both must face the challenge of their stadium situations in the current licencing period. Had Crusaders not folded, it's likely Wakefield would have gone last time round. What exactly is your problem?

Always enjoyed visits to most of those grounds to be honest, whether facilities are up to scratch or not.

Not a problem Seb ! It's more an annoyance at clubs whom come from the Neanderthal side of the penines seem to get away with not progressing their stadia

As I seem to recall Padders never use to go to away matches anyway.

He seems to have issues with ground that have stands that are just terracing with a roof - looks like Warrington are in serious needs of a new ground or re-development of half of our existing one.