Surprise Surprise : Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:55 am  

Salfords new stadium looking doubtful until 2011.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:53 am  

Saints will have theirs first at this rate..

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:09 am  

This is exactly why teams like Leigh and Widnes should have been given a licence instead of Salford, wakey and celtic.

Yet another botch up from the RFL.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:21 am  

Tones Tackle wrote:

This is exactly why teams like Leigh and Widnes should have been given a licence instead of Salford, wakey and celtic.

Yet another botch up from the RFL.

Totally agree. Spend a few quid on some fancy graphics and a website and convince everyone you are going to build a new stadium.

Show me the drawings and show me the work on site, otherwise its all just a load of spin.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:25 am  

Not their fault that the 'credit crunch' turned up, is it? We should just count ourselves lucky that we got the HJ done when capital was more freely available.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:29 am  

Asgardian13 wrote:

Not their fault that the 'credit crunch' turned up, is it? We should just count ourselves lucky that we got the HJ done when capital was more freely available.

Im not having that excuse.

The funds should have been in place long before the 'credit crunch'.

The licence scheme came into being way before the cc and all clubs knew the criteria of having a fit for purpose stadium or at least having one in the pipeline.

All these clubs have done is pull the wool over the RFLs eyes.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:14 am  

Tones Tackle wrote:

This is exactly why teams like Leigh and Widnes should have been given a licence instead of Salford, wakey and celtic.

Yet another botch up from the RFL.

I'd rather have teams that can compete and play decent rugby than useless teams with good (but empty) stadiums

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:28 am  

Tones Tackle wrote:

This is exactly why teams like Leigh and Widnes should have been given a licence instead of Salford, wakey and celtic.

Yet another botch up from the RFL.

Why was the only criteria for things the stadium?

The only one I can fully agree with is Salford as it would appear they lied to get the points for the stadium saying it would be built during this franchise when it seems the chances of that are very slim

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:16 am  

gateaux wrote:

Why was the only criteria for things the stadium?

The only one I can fully agree with is Salford as it would appear they lied to get the points for the stadium saying it would be built during this franchise when it seems the chances of that are very slim

The chances of that were always negligible.

The franchise system is cack. I'd wager Celtic will finish bottom in all 3 seasons, their crowds will be poor, the facilities will not improve nor will youth development.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:40 am  

Tones Tackle wrote:

Im not having that excuse.

The funds should have been in place long before the 'credit crunch'.

The licence scheme came into being way before the cc and all clubs knew the criteria of having a fit for purpose stadium or at least having one in the pipeline.

All these clubs have done is pull the wool over the RFLs eyes.

I think you - as usual - are over simplifying and jumping to ill-informed conclusions. You are implying that Salford don't really want a stadium, they just to want to look like they want one. A lot of hard work and effort will have gone into their stadium project and they must be gutted things keep going wrong. Remember we were extremely fortunate Tesco wanted to build a store in the town and couldn't do it without us.

And as others have said - franchises were not simply awarded on stadium related criteria.