Re: Crusaders Demise? : Sat Nov 13, 2010 4:25 pm  

You couldn't make it up could you? The RFL are a bunch of crooks.

[tb]

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Sat Nov 13, 2010 7:43 pm  

The RFL are a bunch of crooks because a meeting of SL clubs voted for a rule change?

Before we all get on our high horses, should we check out how Cas voted on a) this rule change and b) the decision to keep SL 2012-14 at 14 clubs, knowing that at least one of those would be a club currently in the championship, and one current SL club would definitely not get a franchise?

Because remember: there are two bodies that decide on the size and entry critera for Super League: the RFL and SLE - which means the clubs themselves (it used to be just SLE).

Everybody gets all self-righteous about "the RFL", but they're not the sole people responsible here.

As a report of a slightly better journalistic standard than you find the in Sun spells out:

Andy Wilson wrote:

But crucially, the Crusaders will still be allowed to apply for one of the next round of Super League licences that will be awarded from 2012.

That follows a meeting of Super League clubs last month where they voted to change the rules that had previously disqualified any club entering administration from any subsequent application.

(my emphasis added: as for the - why didn't anyone mention image rights when Wakey were faced with a winding up request from HMRC - err, that's when the meeting happened)



And, fwiw, I'd expect any governing body worth its salt to help a club facing off-field difficulties stay in the comp, as they tried but failed with Blackpool as I hope they're trying with more success with Crusaders.

If we fail to win a franchise next June, it'll be because, despite three years preparation time, we couldn't get a good enough bid together: and we won't lose our place to save an 'expansion' club, we'll lose it to let in a traditional heartland club - the sole thing we should be concentrating on is our own SL bid, not hoping for the death of another rugby league club to save us from our own supposed or feared problems.

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Sat Nov 13, 2010 7:47 pm  

If I were Widnes I would be furious - they were not allowed a SL licence as they had had financial problems and been in administration and here we have a club who are been allowed to continue and able to walk away from their debts which is morally wrong! What about all their creditors who I believe are numerous - including their players - will they all get there money back? If they are allowed a licence whilst Cas are kicked out it is a disgrace - we have lived within our budgets and still managed to finish 7th and 9th respectively - had we thrown caution to the wind we could have finished a lot higher. Had Crusaders lived within their means they would have been no where near 8th.

[tb]

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Sat Nov 13, 2010 7:50 pm  

casfanforlife wrote:

what about all their creditors who I believe are numerous - including their players -

Any actual basis for this belief? because all the reports have referred to 2 creditors: HMRC and Leighton Samuels. The allegation of unlawful deduction of wages from players over pension payments is 1) another matter, 2) also something which apparently dates back to the Samuels years (evidence, the GMB's statement that most of the players it is acting on behalf of are no longer employed by the club) and 3) still to be tested in court

casfanforlife wrote:

Had Crusaders lived within their means they would have been no where near 8th.

See my post in response to Gazemous above - or perhaps you've seen Crusaders' accounts this year? No though not, any more than any of the Wakey trolls know the details of our finances.

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Sat Nov 13, 2010 8:24 pm  

tb wrote:

The RFL are a bunch of crooks because a meeting of SL clubs voted for a rule change?

Before we all get on our high horses, should we check out how Cas voted on a) this rule change and b) the decision to keep SL 2012-14 at 14 clubs, knowing that at least one of those would be a club currently in the championship, and one current SL club would definitely not get a franchise?

Because remember: there are two bodies that decide on the size and entry critera for Super League: the RFL and SLE - which means the clubs themselves (it used to be just SLE).

Everybody gets all self-righteous about "the RFL", but they're not the sole people responsible here.

As a report of a slightly better journalistic standard than you find the in Sun spells out:

(my emphasis added: as for the - why didn't anyone mention image rights when Wakey were faced with a winding up request from HMRC - err, that's when the meeting happened)



And, fwiw, I'd expect any governing body worth its salt to help a club facing off-field difficulties stay in the comp, as they tried but failed with Blackpool as I hope they're trying with more success with Crusaders.

If we fail to win a franchise next June, it'll be because, despite three years preparation time, we couldn't get a good enough bid together: and we won't lose our place to save an 'expansion' club, we'll lose it to let in a traditional heartland club - the sole thing we should be concentrating on is our own SL bid, not hoping for the death of another rugby league club to save us from our own supposed or feared problems.

I keep trying to tell them but alas they won't listen , lets blame the RFL for our/your clubs failings, and the price of fuel at the pumps.

I believe they try to do whats best for the game and for that they will suffer the anger of short sighted people.

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Sat Nov 13, 2010 8:35 pm  

If Cas or Wakie do get turfed of SL it will be nobody's fault except your own. As previously stated, you've both known long enough just exactly what would be required for 2012, and as far as I can see all this bleating about "a heartlands Club" is simply an excuse for doing nowt! The RFL clearly stated that AT LEAST one Club would be coming up, whilst the SL would remain at 14. It's not rocket science my country cousins!

You can be a heartlands club in the lower Leagues, and if you do develop any handy youngsters......well, we'll be delighted to take them off your hands!

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Sat Nov 13, 2010 8:50 pm  

C'mon you superleague is booming in 'Wales and London' know it alls, where are you now? On so many occasions myself and other grounded individuals have pointed out in simple and straight forward fashion how so many things just don't add up with certain clubs.

It would appear with our meagre knowledge, yet abundance of common sense we have been right all along....so take your humble pie and and shove it where the sun don't shine!!

On the other hand it will give the RFL yet another opportunity to show just how bent they are!!

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Sat Nov 13, 2010 9:29 pm  

BillyRhino wrote:

If Cas or Wakie do get turfed of SL it will be nobody's fault except your own. As previously stated, you've both known long enough just exactly what would be required for 2012, and as far as I can see all this bleating about "a heartlands Club" is simply an excuse for doing nowt! The RFL clearly stated that AT LEAST one Club would be coming up, whilst the SL would remain at 14. It's not rocket science my country cousins!

You can be a heartlands club in the lower Leagues, and if you do develop any handy youngsters......well, we'll be delighted to take them off your hands!

Yes it is a mystery how club like leeds seem to spend alot of time in the Castleford area looking at junior players....don't you have any in your city anymore?

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Sat Nov 13, 2010 10:14 pm  

tb wrote:

Before we all get on our high horses, should we check out how Cas voted on a) this rule change and b) the decision to keep SL 2012-14 at 14 clubs, knowing that at least one of those would be a club currently in the championship, and one current SL club would definitely not get a franchise?

You might recall that at the time clubs voted to keep SL at 14 clubs there had been much talk and speculation that two clubs were to be axed and I would suggest that Cas voting to drop only one club was realistically as much as we could do. I admit I don't know how we voted on the rule change, perhaps you could show me the minutes of the meeting.

[tb]

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Sat Nov 13, 2010 10:42 pm  

ExiledTiger wrote:

You might recall that at the time clubs voted to keep SL at 14 clubs there had been much talk and speculation that two clubs were to be axed

only on here and in the media gossip. No serious suggestion or proposals was around that I now of.

ExiledTiger wrote:

and I would suggest that Cas voting to drop only one club was realistically as much as we could do. I admit I don't know how we voted on the rule change, perhaps you could show me the minutes of the meeting.

If I ask a question - ie how did we vote? (or Wakey or Salford or anyone else for that matter) - it's more likely to be an indication that I don't know the answer, than that I do … and a suggestion that before slagging off the RFL for some imagined conspiracy against us, we should find out how our club actually voted on those issues.

It doesn't alter the fact, though, that while some people are imagining some Lewis-Woods conspiracy, it was the clubs that voted (by whatever margin) to change the administration/ insolvency rule or that it was the clubs that voted (by whatever margin) for one of their number to be guaranteed Championship rugby in 2012. It also doesn't alter the fact that whichever current SL cub is unsuccessful in its licence bid, it will be making way for a club from the Championship, not making way for a club already in SL.

Personally I find it sad (if perhaps understandable) to see fans of rugby league rejoicing in the troubles of another club and wishing - nay demanding - that it be kicked out of the comp.

My own opinion fwiw, is that,

a) the RFL and SLE (ie the clubs) made a mistake in promising that one club would be promoted from the championship even if it wasn't one of the best 14 applicants,

b) they made a mistake in religiously sticking to 14 clubs and should have left the number flexible if enough clubs reached a satisfactory standard

c) we should concentrate on making our won licence bid as strong as possible, rather than wishing ill on other clubs to save our skin

d) the ruling body of the sport should offer help to any club, in any league, facing going out of business and work with them to try and secure their continued participation in the league they're in (and tbh I've no reason to believe it doesn't)

e) I hope Crusaders pull through this and continue to help spread the game, just as I hope our next Super League licence bid is successful.