: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:04 pm  

Starbug wrote:

Which is nothing more than somebodies opinion , and therefore no more relative than yours or mine

I think it is a hell of a lot more relevant than yours or mine, as these are the people in the positions of power. And I have a feeling that their opinion is a lot more educated and based on a lot more facts than your or mine, hence how they got into these positions of power.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:05 pm  

Wellsy13 wrote:

No, they wouldn't swap them, because that's not how the process works.

You really need to understand the licensing process more before trying to argue against it.

yeah, you got that part right....that would be their (RFL's) argument too

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:06 pm  

Wellsy13 wrote:

......their opinion is a lot more educated and based on a lot more facts than your or mine, hence how they got into these positions of power.

I did think that about the lads and lasses that ran the banking industry of late

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:06 pm  

Wellsy13 wrote:

No, they wouldn't swap them, because that's not how the process works.

You really need to understand the licensing process more before trying to argue against it.

There is no process

You are stupid if you think there is , Franchises are there to expand the sport , nothing more , nothing less

All most want is the RFL to actually announce what they want

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:06 pm  

bluesox4evaaa wrote:

Congratulations for bringing out 3 examples from the history of super league which argue otherwise. clearly my argument is outgunned by such strong counter evidence. The wakefield/castleford battle, thinking about it, was a complete waste of interest.

I think that the interest in that game was that players were playing for their jobs as there would have been no guarantee that the players on the losing team would have been retained due to the big drop in income that came with relegation.

Being relegated from a full time league to a semi pro one meant that the consequences of relegation from Super League could have been too severe for a club without a backer to help them out. The stakes for playing that one game were IMO too high. It could well have convinced the RFL even more that they were doing the right thing in introducing franchises.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:07 pm  

Wellsy13 wrote:

I think it is a hell of a lot more relevant than yours or mine, as these are the people in the positions of power. And I have a feeling that their opinion is a lot more basis than your or mine.

EDITED

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:08 pm  

Wellsy13 wrote:

I think it is a hell of a lot more relevant than yours or mine, as these are the people in the positions of power. And I have a feeling that their opinion is a lot more educated and based on a lot more facts than your or mine, hence how they got into these positions of power.

You really dont know about Mr Woods previous do you ?

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:08 pm  

classycas2009 wrote:

well...... SPOT ON CHAP

Would you have liked it if Cas had got relegated last year? And then spent this season putting 60 points past teams, and then next season getting hammered every other week and getting relegated again? With Westerman and Owen playing for Leeds, and replaced by journeymen Aussies in the Cas team? Would that be good for the game?

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:09 pm  

Wes Hooligan wrote:

Would you have liked it if Cas had got relegated last year? And then spent this season putting 60 points past teams, and then next season getting hammered every other week? With Westerman and Owen playing for Leeds, and replaced by journeymen Aussies in the Cas team? Would that be good for the game?

Which tells you what ?

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:12 pm  

Starbug wrote:

Which tells you what ?

That automatic promotion and relegation between Super League and the Championship is an absolute farce in modern day Rugby League, and will continue to be until the Championship becomes a full-time league.