Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 2:50 pm  

tb wrote:

tbf to 'buggy (which isn't easy ) - yes, when licensing was first mooted in 2005, Lewis cited us as an example of a super league level club currently in the National Leagues (which was immediately seized upon by various fans of other clubs as evidence that we were Richard Lewis's lovechild and they'd do anything to get us back into SL. Which is mildly interesting given many of our own fans view of Mr Lewis and the RFL now)

See I'm always right , and you know it

[tb]

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 4:01 pm  

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 4:26 pm  

smoking monkey wrote:

Also does anyone seriously believe we would have passed up the chance of promotion for want of sticking some seats in the Princess St..... we were hardly in the same position as Whitehaven whose ground virtually required a rebuild. Talk about clutching at straws to convince ones-self and others that Cas are in SL courtesy of rule-bending.

Funny you should mention that , I asked Nigel Wood if they would allow Haven to be promoted 10 minutes before the start of the match between yourselves at the ' Rec ' in 2005 , good match that

The Haven director was happy , saying that was a question he couldn't ask , and was glad somebody neutral had asked it

Nigel just mumbled something about we'll see and changed the subject

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 7:56 pm  

Starbug wrote: Funny you should mention that , I asked Nigel Wood if they would allow Haven to be promoted 10 minutes before the start of the match between yourselves at the ' Rec ' in 2005 , good match that The Haven director was happy , saying that was a question he couldn't ask , and was glad somebody neutral had asked it Nigel just mumbled something about we'll see and changed the subject Are you a sandwich short of a picnic or what, why post such garbage, once and for all to put your 2005 theory to bed regarding the rule change for castlefords benefit "Whitehaven's Recreation Ground falls below Super League's minimum standards with a capacity of less than 7,000 and has only one small, seated stand. But whatever the result of the grand final, they will begin work this month on a new 1,000-seat stand to increase the capacity to more than the necessary 8,000" Source

Starbug wrote: Funny you should mention that , I asked Nigel Wood if they would allow Haven to be promoted 10 minutes before the start of the match between yourselves at the ' Rec ' in 2005 , good match that The Haven director was happy , saying that was a question he couldn't ask , and was glad somebody neutral had asked it Nigel just mumbled something about we'll see and changed the subject Are you a sandwich short of a picnic or what, why post such garbage, once and for all to put your 2005 theory to bed regarding the rule change for castlefords benefit "Whitehaven's Recreation Ground falls below Super League's minimum standards with a capacity of less than 7,000 and has only one small, seated stand. But whatever the result of the grand final, they will begin work this month on a new 1,000-seat stand to increase the capacity to more than the necessary 8,000" Source

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 9:17 pm  

Things get more farcical by the day!! Now the RFL are paying the players wages http://www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=20565

Things get more farcical by the day!! Now the RFL are paying the players wages http://www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=20565

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 9:20 pm  

Speedy wrote: Are you a sandwich short of a picnic or what, why post such garbage, once and for all to put your 2005 theory to bed regarding the rule change for castlefords benefit "Whitehaven's Recreation Ground falls below Super League's minimum standards with a capacity of less than 7,000 and has only one small, seated stand. But whatever the result of the grand final, they will begin work this month on a new 1,000-seat stand to increase the capacity to more than the necessary 8,000" Source People tell lies , a bit like saying ' our new stadium at Glasshoughton will be ready for 2008/9/10/11/12 season , as I said I wont mention you know what again

Speedy wrote: Are you a sandwich short of a picnic or what, why post such garbage, once and for all to put your 2005 theory to bed regarding the rule change for castlefords benefit "Whitehaven's Recreation Ground falls below Super League's minimum standards with a capacity of less than 7,000 and has only one small, seated stand. But whatever the result of the grand final, they will begin work this month on a new 1,000-seat stand to increase the capacity to more than the necessary 8,000" Source People tell lies , a bit like saying ' our new stadium at Glasshoughton will be ready for 2008/9/10/11/12 season , as I said I wont mention you know what again

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 9:26 pm  

bigalf wrote: Things get more farcical by the day!! Now the RFL are paying the players wages http://www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=20565 Surely that is better than 1 They dont have any players and cannot contest next years SL [ or is that now your hope as it would all but guarantee your SL place ] 2 The RFL give them the money but dont tell us , ie it's all done sneakily like they usually do Better that they survive , as I'm sure all true RL fans would not want any club to fold to benifit their own , would they

bigalf wrote: Things get more farcical by the day!! Now the RFL are paying the players wages http://www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=20565 Surely that is better than 1 They dont have any players and cannot contest next years SL [ or is that now your hope as it would all but guarantee your SL place ] 2 The RFL give them the money but dont tell us , ie it's all done sneakily like they usually do Better that they survive , as I'm sure all true RL fans would not want any club to fold to benifit their own , would they

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 9:35 pm  

Starbug wrote:

Surely that is better than

1 They dont have any players and cannot contest next years SL [ or is that now your hope as it would all but guarantee your SL place ]

2 The RFL give them the money but dont tell us , ie it's all done sneakily like they usually do

Better that they survive , as I'm sure all true RL fans would not want any club to fold to benifit their own , would they

I thought you were arguing for a level playing field for all.

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 9:47 pm  

bigalf wrote:

I thought you were arguing for a level playing field for all.

Course I am , but I'll bring the spirit level , which just to annoy speedy bring me to another interesting story once when doing a survey at a Chinese gentlemans house , he said I was using a ' spiritual ' level

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 9:54 pm  

Starbug wrote:

Course I am , but I'll bring the spirit level , which just to annoy speedy bring me to another interesting story once when doing a survey at a Chinese gentlemans house , he said I was using a ' spiritual ' level