Re: Feisal Nahaboo : Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:52 pm  

smoking monkey wrote:

No disrespect to Campbell who, like Glover at Wakey, seems to at least have the drive and vision we lack but he can't magic up the big town image, catchment area and resulting attendance figures to satisfy the RFL.
Halifax and/or expansionists next up and then a closed shop.

Us or Wakey out, No Fax/Fev in prob Northampton or Baku( Its in Azerbaiijan " The country was among the birthplaces of Rugby League and is located at the heart of ancient civilizations."

You heard it here first

Re: Feisal Nahaboo : Mon Mar 26, 2012 1:53 pm  

smoking monkey wrote:

No disrespect to Campbell who, like Glover at Wakey, seems to at least have the drive and vision we lack but he can't magic up the big town image, catchment area and resulting attendance figures to satisfy the RFL.
Halifax and/or expansionists next up and then a closed shop.

The inclusion of a provision for expelling a club within the licence period was clearly aimed at us and Wakefield. Wakefield, all credit to them, have got their house in order off the field, are improving their current ground while working on the new one, have got their crowds up and are beginning to see some results on the pitch. I can't see them being demoted early at the moment.

The only thing saving us from early demotion at present would seem to be the lack of a credible alternative. Unfortunately for Featherstone I can't see any way the RFL would replace us with them, it's not even maintaining the status quo when you look at crowds, size, etc. I think the only option would be an expansionist one, probably Toulouse. Promising meetings between them and the RFL recently but I think the RFL will be very wary of pushing them too soon after Crusaders.

So while not guaranteed by any means I think we probably will see out our licence period.

Re: Feisal Nahaboo : Mon Mar 26, 2012 2:02 pm  

smoking monkey wrote:

No disrespect to Campbell who, like Glover at Wakey, seems to at least have the drive and vision we lack but he can't magic up the big town image, catchment area and resulting attendance figures to satisfy the RFL.
Halifax and/or expansionists next up and then a closed shop.

I thought that as well but Mark seems convinced we will end up in super league, i reckon there are 2 divisions coming. The big town image the RFL want will never materialise

Re: Feisal Nahaboo : Mon Mar 26, 2012 2:04 pm  

StuMain wrote:

The inclusion of a provision for expelling a club within the licence period was clearly aimed at us and Wakefield. Wakefield, all credit to them, have got their house in order off the field, are improving their current ground while working on the new one, have got their crowds up and are beginning to see some results on the pitch. I can't see them being demoted early at the moment.

The only thing saving us from early demotion at present would seem to be the lack of a credible alternative. Unfortunately for Featherstone I can't see any way the RFL would replace us with them, it's not even maintaining the status quo when you look at crowds, size, etc. I think the only option would be an expansionist one, probably Toulouse. Promising meetings between them and the RFL recently but I think the RFL will be very wary of pushing them too soon after Crusaders.

So while not guaranteed by any means I think we probably will see out our licence period.

I wouldnt be too sure i keep hearing rumours of several super league clubs in dire financial straights

Re: Feisal Nahaboo : Mon Mar 26, 2012 2:08 pm  

gingdong wrote:

i keep hearing rumours of several super league clubs in dire financial straights

It's well known that very few of the SL clubs are bastions of sound finance.

Re: Feisal Nahaboo : Mon Mar 26, 2012 2:28 pm  

StuMain wrote:

It's well known that very few of the SL clubs are bastions of sound finance.

Even Leeds didnt have enough money for two tins of red paint and half the team had to have their natural hair colour....................................

A whino at work said '' we were cassed last night'' ......... that hurt

Re: Feisal Nahaboo : Mon Mar 26, 2012 4:19 pm  

cas all the way wrote:

No gaurantees? As i said. We are superleague for another 2 and half years. So any fans from NL who want to bite at us for being rubbish can come back then. We are superleague now and they're not.

Not necessarily; when the RFL announced franchises, they explicity warned Wakefield and Castleford that if they did not deliver progress on their promised new grounds, the franchise could be removed at any time throughout the period.

For your sake, I hope RW isn't as lackadaisical about that threat as you seem to be.

Re: Feisal Nahaboo : Mon Mar 26, 2012 4:25 pm  

bren2k wrote:

Not necessarily; when the RFL announced franchises, they explicity warned Wakefield and Castleford that if they did not deliver progress on their promised new grounds, the franchise could be removed at any time throughout the period.

For your sake, I hope RW isn't as lackadaisical about that threat as you seem to be.

Didnt know that. My apologies

Re: Feisal Nahaboo : Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:17 pm  

cas all the way wrote:

Didnt know that. My apologies

None needed!

It does seem that the RFL are following up on the threat too - our temporary ground improvements were included in the franchise application and right on cue, Big Nige was at BV a couple of weeks ago to carry out an inspection.

Re: Feisal Nahaboo : Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:20 pm  

bren2k wrote:

Big Nige was at BV a couple of weeks ago to carry out an inspection.

He just heard about the pie problem and went to see if that was fixed