I was mulling this over watching the highlights [Catalan v Cas and listening to their crowds when the tries were scored.



imagine this



If it was the other way round us (wire) playing in the French league because (for the sake of argument) the French league is a lot stronger.

We had to travel to France every other week against teams we have little to no history with.

We had to find genuine intensity to gee the team up, vastly outnumbered on the away terrace and no home derby matches, hell no home country matches.



Would we enjoy the game even half as much ?

Do the French fans and team deserve a lot more respect than we currently give ?



Another point



Do people see the Catalans' status as a super league club as a temporary measure and by temporary i mean until the French league takes off and has at least 13 maybe 14 teams at NL1 level. This could be 20 years but if it was the case would we lose Le Catalan ?



Is super league the only hope to improve the overall French game ?

I believe Catalans opted to play in SL thus leaving their reasonably competitive domestic competition they have made their own bed. Also they took the place of an established SL side most unfairly. I'm not sure their fans are disrespected either.

They must be as mad as a box of frogs....

I didn't say disrespected but do they actually deserve more credit than they get ?



You say reasonably competitive but in no way could you compare it to Super League and because of their entry to SL the game has taken a huge leap which I'm sure the old UTC playing in France wouldn't have achieved.



My main point though is regardless of whose decision it was, do we underrate the whole French 'experiment' because i'd struggle if the shoe was on the other foot to maintain the passion i currently hold.

Try and imagine how a loyal Catalan came to be.... 'right half our games are in England.... No one else round here plays it..... And our homes games arer here and there'.. What kind of sane Frenchman thinks ' it's a win win situation'?



Good on em!

maybe not the best week playing saints to bring this up, may take it to the VT

Hardly a case of gross unfairness. Catalans had a far better chance of making a success of SL than Widnes did, they had better finances in place and a better infrastructure and far better management, The management at Widnes during that time was really shoddy, they had two pretty good coaches, Kelly and Endacott, who were both undermined by their board and they shot themselves in the foot. Ordinarily they wouldn't have gone down as the second bottom team in the league, but they were in shape for relegation, they won 1 from their last 12 games that season and they were copping some hammerings.



Widnes had four years in SL, they never finished higher than 7th and were second from bottom in two of those four seasons. In comparison, Catalans have had four years in SL, they've had a 3rd place league finish, a Final Eliminator playoff finish and a Wembley final.....they've had stable management and been financially healthy.



Whilst I do agree that Widnes has a great heritage in rugby league, you can't be given favours on sentiment alone. If it hadn't been for Catalans coming in and Widnes had survived they would have been dead ducks in 2006 with a much stronger Castleford coming up with a stable board and good coach in Terry Matterson....Widnes would have certainly dropped in 2006.

Fair enough although a load of speculation for the 06 season as I am sure you would admit. Would you be so relaxed if it was WWRLFC who were 'sacrificed' for the greater good? Let's not forget Warrington were not pulling up any trees in the SL era at that time either.



Anyway my point was that it was unfair in a sporting context rather than this "franchiseability" crap the "visionaries" at the helm of the RL consider. The status quo previously provided for the bottom team to be relegated, this was changed to bottom 2 sides to effect a fast track for Catalans. This is clearly anti-competitive and would never be allowed in football at Hackney marshes level never mind the top flight of professional rugby league.



I know if it was Warrington who were the team with "great heritage in RL" who suffered like Widnes did we would have been up in arms and bitter to this day.



Whilst we are on the subject I genuinely would be interested to hear your views on the benefit of both Harlequins and Crusaders in SL when compared against the obvious downsides of diluting Sky TV income and the gate receipt loss to each and every club that plays against them.

Sorry to butt in and I know its early days but Crusaders average home attendance is higher than that of Salford, Castleford, Catalans, Harliquins, Wakefield & Hull KR.

And they brought as many, if not more than Bradford.

Crusaders will pay their way this season, Quins are on a terrible run.

in every aspect on and off the field

Fair do's. Only 2 home games though in Leeds and Hull bolstered by a lot of furore, free tickets and zealous Red Hall support.



Let's consider the average attendance for the teams you mention in 2009 shall we.



Catalans - 9,159

Hull KR - 8,501

Castleford - 7,489

Wakefield - 5,892

Salford - 4,467

Crusaders - 3,668

Harlequins - 3,436



You make my "expansionism doesn't work as there is not the support base to justify it not least when you consider you are taking the place of the likes of Leigh, Widnes etc" point for me. The farce surrounding your move from the Valleys to 32.8 miles from Widnes doesn't help either.



I wish you no harm (if you are a Crusader) but honestly don't think you deserve a place in the elite league of northern hemisphere RL when there are so many better qualified teams staking a place before you.