In regards to your first answer where you say it's the only criteria. Well yes, that's why you have leagues. If you win it, you win promotion. Very simple.ourla wrote: ↑Tue Mar 26, 2019 2:27 pmSure, at the moment this is the only criteria.
And you are entitled to your opinion. However, just to flesh this out. To me the point of ring fencing is to create a stable and competitive league that provides a long term robust framework for the professional game. To that end I want clubs to have up to grade training facilities, match day facilities, sufficient trained staff, etc. to match up with the existing clubs.
I'd want to see security of tenure.
And that is what I would propose, some due dilligence checks to make sure that is the case.
In the meantime another better financed team loses out and the competition suffers. Ring fencing could avoid this situation.
Is there due diligence done on exsisting Premiership Clubs? The promoted club should be treated but the same way as current Premiership Clubs. The board at the club should know how to run it sensibly. It doesn't need Premiership Rugby or anyone else telling them. If they want to secure their future, they'd spend the money wisely. This can still be done without ring fencing.
In regards to facilities- Other clubs have shared grounds so why would this be an issue?
There's too many excuses trying to be found in favour of ring fencing.