Super League to stay at 14

[GSF]

 Will we be in the 14?  I hope so. Are our attendances good enough? I'm not convinced. Would I change SL right now if I were the RFL? I would only swap Salford for Widnes. I'd keep wakefield, but put them on notice about their ground. That it WILL exclude them next time. I cannot see any other outcome other than NO CHANGE.

Our attendances have been very reasonable throughout 2006/7/8 and 9.If there is a sudden drop off this year then I hope common sense prevails and the RFL take into account what is stark,staring obvious, that a lot of interest has dwindled due to no prospect of promotion.If they are decent,genuine people they will look at our crowds over the last few years and not just the one.
I would give Salford another go but I think Wakefield have had more than enough time to get a stadium in order since their promotion in 99.There is an imbalance of Yorkshire teams so Wakefield or Cas for me ,with or without a new stadium,to make way for Widnes.

[Pepe Le Pew]

And its also commented on by Mr. Lewis in a negative way.
No, you confirm my point very well. You argue not because it’s unfair, but because it’s Widnes.

Only because you’ve completely missed/ignored my point.

Pepe - shall we go over old ground AGAIN? Like it or not Widnes were excluded from SL because they had recently been in administration. You can't change that no matter what argument you put forward. That's the way it is.

It is old ground. If Widnes’ administration was a hurdle the club could never have gotten over, then the RFL should’ve made it perfectly clear to Steve O’Connor that this was the case. They said the opposite. This point was also the main point of Derek Twigg’s early day motion in parliament. Why on earth tell SOC that administration wasn’t a problem - as long as the business plan was credible – but then knock the club back pretty much entirely on being in administration? If the RFL had just said we cannot be given a licence for 2012 due to our administration, no-one could possibly have argued, because it would have been a valid reason, but they didn’t did they?

This dishonesty cost the club tens of thousands of pounds putting the bid together - Money that could have been invested in the club or the Valhalla Foundation.

Celtic Crusaders struggled to get through one season. Now they’re gone. That says a lot about the rigour and due diligence of the licence process. 

To be honest, it matters very little who outside of the RFL thinks that way.

That’s very true. The licence criteria clearly counts for nothing and it’s in the hands of people who have shown a culture of dishonesty, favouritism and incompetence over the years. It is the reason why fans in the lower leagues are beginning to walk away from the sport for good. If things carry on the way they are, that will include me.

This is why our season tickets sales are down. The Championship has been de-valued by the RFL’s licence system. No-one down here trusts it, so they’re turning their backs on it.

I AGREE with you, Widnes should not be denied a place in 2012. BUT, and this is the key, who would we replace? When you look at SL there are not too many candidates for exclusion. Given what's happened at Crusaders I'd say they're unlikely to leave. Especially if they get results and have good attendances. (It remains to be seen). Lewis says basically London are needed (there's a thread elsewhere discussing this). We can safely say that Saints, Wigan, Leeds etc will not be relegated so who's left? Salford, Wakefield, Castleford and perhaps Hull KR. I personally think its down to Wakey and Salford.

I’ve already told you that I will not be discussing the merit of any particular club. What I will say is that these clubs have been well aware of the RFL’s drive to modernize since ‘framing the future’ in the 90’s. They have failed where we have succeeded. Most of them have had SL money, where we have not. It is complete folly to compare attendances of clubs in the Championship with clubs in Super League. Hull KR averaged 2,000 and under in this league. Widnes had better attendances, with a club heading for relegation than four current SL clubs. Of the clubs you mention, only Castleford could match us in this league and that’s only after spending one season down here. If they’d spent as much time down here as us, I doubt they would .

                     2002             2003              2004             2005

Widnes           6510              6511              6153             6794

Wakey            3889             4017               4806             5100

Salford            4199              n/a                3996             4093

Quins              3803             3546              3458              4003

Hudds             n/a               4722               4362             5853

The current RFL licence policy is killing interest in the game at a lower level. Widnes are consistently the best supported club in this league. We are the club which sets the benchmark for other Championship clubs to aim for. If the RFL do not give Widnes a licence in 2012, the rest may as well give up hope too. What would that do to attendances in the Championship?

. I don't care if you think Widnes is the greatest RL club on the planet

You’re putting words in my mouth now, things I’ve never said or thought, in order to patronise me and the point I’m making. This is the reason that there is little point discussing anything with you.

[ozviking]

"Why the hell would any Widnes fan feel the need to ‘argue so strongly’ on behalf of Warrington or Wigan or Leeds and Bradford’s SL status?"
Now this is in response to my question would you argue if it were not Widnes in our situation. Your answer here is clearly NO.

You then go to say you agree that they should be included (which was never in question).
I Think most, if not all Widnes fans would agree with their inclusion and the undoubted merit of their likely bids.. I’ve actually said as much myself in earlier in this thread in a reply to GSF.

I'll skip the rest because it's old data and irrelevant - Widnes were ecluded for the reason stated. Listen to this question, I'm sorry for keeping harking on at it. But I need ONE answer to One question: Do you specifically know as a matter of fact, that the RFL dismissed our application for reasons other than that given by them?
If Pepe, you can say yes and give me the verifiable facts then I will personally make a $200 donation to TIW (that I don't support as you know). I mean that seriously.

". I don't care if you think Widnes is the greatest RL club on the planet"
You’re putting words in my mouth now, things I’ve never said or thought, in order to patronise me and the point I’m making. This is the reason that there is little point discussing anything with you.

Oooh cheeky, Pepe, you accused me of being selective in my quotes, now I'll put my whole quote in context: (I've underlined the important point!):
"don't care if you think Widnes is the greatest RL club on the planet - You will see soon that I actually say that, stay tuned."

Enough now, for Petes sake! LOL (A joke!!)

[rs]

The only conclusive eviedence you can produce is a signed admission in blood from Lewis. Short of that you can only look at the facts and draw a conclusion. It is entirely possible for two people to come to a different conclusion from the same facts. Widnes fans generally think the process is flawed and some do not see any failings in the RL. Dependent on your pre conceived standpoint it is difficult to sway one from a different persuaison.

Most people I know who support a number of teams have come to the conclusion that the teams were not selected on the stated criteria.

[RB]

Pepe - shall we go over old ground AGAIN? Like it or not Widnes were excluded from SL because they had recently been in administration. You can't change that no matter what argument you put forward. That's the way it is.

Yes let's go over old ground.
Widnes were in administartion before we put in our franchise application.
If this were the only reason for our failure to gain a franchise we would have not have applied in the first place.

[mick george]

Yes let's go over old ground.
Widnes were in administartion before we put in our franchise application.
If this were the only reason for our failure to gain a franchise we would have not have applied in the first place.

Then pray tell me why did SOC offer to put up a £500,000 bond------It was to try to prove we was solvent and we was not

I am afraid it is getting really boring now going over old ground, no wonder the RL world think the Widnes speccies are a moaning biased bunch of so and so,s

[Pepe Le Pew]

"Why the hell would any Widnes fan feel the need to ‘argue so strongly’ on behalf of Warrington or Wigan or Leeds and Bradford’s SL status?"
Now this is in response to my question would you argue if it were not Widnes in our situation. Your answer here is clearly NO.

You asked why Widnes fans aren’t arguing strongly on behalf of  Warrington or Wigan or Leeds and Bradford’s SL status. I told you why. Now you’re asking what would I do if they were in our position. You then come up with your own answer by putting words in my mouth again. Your lines of reasoning and analytical faculties are flawed. You’re completely potty.  What the hell do you think this proves?

You then go to say you agree that they should be included (which was never in question).
I Think most, if not all Widnes fans would agree with their inclusion and the undoubted merit of their likely bids.. I’ve actually said as much myself in earlier in this thread in a reply to GSF.

I’m not sure you’d get any argument from anyone about this. They are not the clubs Widnes are competing with. This nonsense doesn’t prove anything, is irrelevant and just plain barmy.

I'll skip the rest because it's old data and irrelevant - Widnes were ecluded for the reason stated. Listen to this question, I'm sorry for keeping harking on at it. But I need ONE answer to One question: Do you specifically know as a matter of fact, that the RFL dismissed our application for reasons other than that given by them?
If Pepe, you can say yes and give me the verifiable facts then I will personally make a $200 donation to TIW (that I don't support as you know). I mean that seriously

My harking back to the licence decision was not an attempt to cry about it and demand we be put in SL. That opportunity past the moment the decision was made. My point was to show the flawed reasoning and capricious nature of the RFL. I’m trying to show that they are unfit to govern the sport and that the licence system is a farce as a result.. The question you ask actually proves what I am saying. All we have is that short statement the RFL released after the licence decisions were made. Steve O’Connor has asked for a full written statement on the decision, but has said that none was forth coming. That’s very amateurish, to say the least, from the RFL. So all we have to go by is that statement which put our failure to secure a licence down to our administration. If you know of another reason, perhaps you can enlighten us all?


As far as referring to attendances, it was you who were referring to them in the first place, with a great deal of misplaced criticism that required addressing.
.

". I don't care if you think Widnes is the greatest RL club on the planet"
You’re putting words in my mouth now, things I’ve never said or thought, in order to patronise me and the point I’m making. This is the reason that there is little point discussing anything with you.

Oooh cheeky, Pepe, you accused me of being selective in my quotes, now I'll put my whole quote in context: (I've underlined the important point!):
"don't care if you think Widnes is the greatest RL club on the planet - You will see soon that I actually say that, stay tuned."

Let’s take the whole paragraph shall we?

But seriously, of course you're biased. You're a blind Widnes supporter, nothing wrong with that until you start to say everyone's against you. I don't care if you think Widnes is the greatest RL club on the planet - You will see soon that I actually say that, stay tuned. But it's when you feel that the world is against you, I have a problem. The RFL would love nothing more that to have the 14 best supported clubs in SL.

I have never said anywhere that the world is against us

I have never said we are the ‘greatest RL club on the planet’.

I have never said that I ‘feel that the world is against you/us’

I just don’t trust the RFL, and don’t like what they are doing to the lower leagues. They have a cloak and dagger approach to expansion, and are willing to completely ignore their own criteria when it suits them. They lack any sort of integrity imo. This isn’t just an issue for Widnes fans either. It isn’t just Widnes fans complaining about them. I tried to explain this to you, but you dismissed it out of hand because it doesn’t fit in with your argument about whinging, biased Widnes supporters. I have actually stated that, far from the world being against us, we have an incredible amount of support and sympathy throughout the sport.

[Huggybear]

So we have a poster who writes any postings off, no matter how articulate or well researched, as being blindly pro-widnes.

Since they persist in frequenting here yet also persist in expressing their disdain for something we can do nothing about (being Widnes fans on a Widnes messageboard) despite us putting forward reasonable arguments it's hard to understand why the moderators allow this persistent attacker

i.e. why is he here if Widnes fans always are to be automatically written off? It's obviously not to interact in any reasonable way.

[RB]

Then pray tell me why did SOC offer to put up a £500,000 bond------It was to try to prove we was solvent and we was not

I am afraid it is getting really boring now going over old ground, no wonder the RL world think the Widnes speccies are a moaning biased bunch of so and so,s

He was obviosuly aware it was a potential problem as we all were.
There is a difference between a potential problem and it being the sole reason we were not allowed in.

[ozviking]

So we have a poster who writes any postings off, no matter how articulate or well researched, as being blindly pro-widnes.

Since they persist in frequenting here yet also persist in expressing their disdain for something we can do nothing about (being Widnes fans on a Widnes messageboard) despite us putting forward reasonable arguments it's hard to understand why the moderators allow this persistent attacker

i.e. why is he here if Widnes fans always are to be automatically written off? It's obviously not to interact in any reasonable way.

Take it direct to the Mods Huggy..
It's a great idea, let's ban everyone you don't like. Hey just a minute, that's the same attitude you apply to RL - as long as I'm (Widnes') alright to hell with the rest. Problem is that attitude doesn't work - does it? 'cos there's more than you in the world.
I'm still waiting for a FACT to appear. 
Come on and give me facts of misdoing by the RFL.

[Huggybear]

oz don't change the subject, no  matter how well articulated and backed up people put the case across on here the bottom line is you write them off as being blindly pro-Widnes just because they're widnes fans. That's not so much the problem, you're entitled to think that, it's what you're doing here on a Widnes messageboard if you automatically write us all off, it's not to listen to us. I do think the mods should ban you.

[King Viking]

Yes let's go over old ground.
Widnes were in administartion before we put in our franchise application.
If this were the only reason for our failure to gain a franchise we would have not have applied in the first place.

I do think this is partly where the problems with the RFL lie. They used the administration as the primary reason we didnt get in - BUT, they were aware of this before we applied, so why didnt they just say "well Widnes cant apply because of their recent administration". It's a question no one will probably ever have the answer to, so I guess it's pointless worrying about it.

Let's look on to 2012, when it's going to take a very brave man not to award us a licence.

[RB]

I do think this is partly where the problems with the RFL lie. They used the administration as the primary reason we didnt get in - BUT, they were aware of this before we applied, so why didnt they just say "well Widnes cant apply because of their recent administration". It's a question no one will probably ever have the answer to, so I guess it's pointless worrying about it.

Let's look on to 2012, when it's going to take a very brave man not to award us a licence.

It's a pity they don't have the 30 year rule like in Government.
Where after 30 years they release all the Cabinet Munuites and Government Documents 

[ozviking]

Huggy,
The problem with your request is simple:
You, yourself, said that the promotion / relegation method currently in use is ok.... but you just don't think its ok in Widnes' league. Surely it's either ok or not.

You say, that the RFL did not reject Widnes' application for the reason they gave. You can't prove it. Just saying it is not enough to make it right.

Surely, if the RFL conspired against Widnes because they wanted Salford and Crusaders in, then they also did the same agaiinst other applicants. Yet, you don't argue anyone elses case. You're only interested in Widnes and not justice for all.

You keep arguing I'm anti Widnes, yet I keep pulling your argument apart over a conspiracy that doesn't stack up.

I argue against what YOU say. Never against Widnes. I agree with the RFL's way of doing things. That happens to exclude Widnes for the reasons they gave.

You try to turn that into an emotive point to stir up pro-Widnes / anti-Widnes fervour. It isn't the case at all.

The simple fact is this: The RFL gave their reason. Neither you nor anyone else can prove that to be untrue. But you keep saying it is.

Now, I've answered this other point a million times too. Why did the RFL not tell us to not apply. Simple, they wanted all applications in BEFORE making a decision. That's not wrong, that's being sensible. If they had rejected us before applying they would have been accused of pre-judging. What if an expanded 14 team SuperLeague had only 13 applicants after we'd been told to not apply?

Huggy, if you want to argue lets do it sensibly. Provide your facts and let them speak for themselves. If you can't provide any fact then say nothing. Because without facts I will shout you down every time. You seem to think that this board is a vehicle for you to be able to say anything about anyone without any recourse to the truth. You accuse the RFL of Bias - untrue. You accuse me of being anti-Widnes - untrue. Your concept of what's right or wrong is yours. It's certainly not a reason for moderators to ban anyone, me included. I don't recall it being against the rules of the board to disagree with untruths. Maybe in your world it is?

I said months ago to you and others that the Widnes club's image is being tarnished by this constant whinging. Richard Lewis said as much on the BBC. When will you learn? It is dmaging our club. Now, do you want to damage the club? No? Well drop it.

I didn't hear Richard Lewis say I was doing anything wrong ;o)

[rs]

The RFL clearly rode roughshod over the criteria they set to get the teams in they wanted. I am not saying it is anti Widnes bias but I am saying that flawed process was to Widnes's detriment.


Big think that hasn't been mentioned is that the RFL were aware that Celtic had played players illegally when obtaining/retaining their Championship One status. Championship One status was a prerequisite of applying for a franchise. Incidentally these crimes are still pending sentencing and they have let Crusaders metamorphose and stay in the comp - could anyone honestly imagine the FA putting up with either scenario.