Re: Batley - oh bugg*r .... : Mon Sep 01, 2014 12:08 pm  

My wife parked in a pay and display car park earlier today and forgot to pay and display, but didn't get a ticket. Next time I get one my defence is now sorted. Bound to get off on appeal.

Re: Batley - oh bugg*r .... : Mon Sep 01, 2014 1:08 pm  

Burley you come over on here as such a k**b.
I've never known anyone like you for being negative.
Risk assessments, method statements where are you coming from.
Don't know about taxi for March I wish they would get you one.

Re: Batley - oh bugg*r .... : Mon Sep 01, 2014 1:11 pm  

cougartime wrote:

Blimey, Burley, the club shows a bit of initiative and then gets damned for it. Who'd be a chairman. Not you thats for sure!

Not at all cougartime , the pitch is in a bad enough state through lack of care without making
It worse and risking players with things like bottle caps tentpegs et al.
Just my opinion thats all

Re: Batley - oh bugg*r .... : Mon Sep 01, 2014 1:19 pm  

Rach wrote:

Bit unfair that Burley , both the camping ventures Bingley Live and Tour De France have been pretty successful and have brought in money to the club through camp fees, bar takings and food sales .

And yes Gary wasn't at the game yesterday as he was driving the shuttle bus to and from the Festival site for the campers, something he's been doing all weekend ....

Indeed much needed money Rach and that's great , no problems with that.
My worry was making sure every thing was cleared up right so not
To cause any injuries etc , should have worded it better with a hint less
Sarcasm.

And FAIR PLAY To our glorious leader for running the shuttle bus all
Weekend , well done that man.

TAXI FOR MARCH.

Re: Batley - oh bugg*r .... : Mon Sep 01, 2014 2:25 pm  

Lawkholme Len wrote:

Rach is right and it seems the DR rules are so complicated that even now they are not clear. How about if all points scored by DR players in games after the deadline were removed? Red Hall should be red-faced at the way they have bungled this. The phrase 'Not fit for purpose' comes to mind.

Wouldnt have affected the bat v Sheff score if Fairbanks try was chalked off, we won 18 28 and despite what a cougar fan posted earlier Fairbanks try wasnt the winning try we were already winning before he scored.

Re: Batley - oh bugg*r .... : Mon Sep 01, 2014 2:37 pm  

TAXI FOR BURLEYCOUGAR

What are you talking about? You are clearly mad going on about tent pegs etc. Do you expect to find the some kind of warzone on sunday when you go down. Like when people camped for Le Tour i don't recall any eyes getting poked out on Raleigh Chopper spokes.

Re: Batley - oh bugg*r .... : Mon Sep 01, 2014 3:00 pm  

Bat Lad wrote:

Lawkholme Len wrote:

Rach is right and it seems the DR rules are so complicated that even now they are not clear. How about if all points scored by DR players in games after the deadline were removed? Red Hall should be red-faced at the way they have bungled this. The phrase 'Not fit for purpose' comes to mind.

Wouldnt have affected the bat v Sheff score if Fairbanks try was chalked off, we won 18 28 and despite what a cougar fan posted earlier Fairbanks try wasnt the winning try we were already winning before he scored.

Lets get back to basics, Batley and Donnie cheated and the 3 points penaltyshould have stood.

Re: Batley - oh bugg*r .... : Mon Sep 01, 2014 3:16 pm  

If Dave Woods at Whitehaven states that last season the RFL informed them that by playing Paul Clough they would be lose points from the game (League Express page 3 14th September) “.....were told we couldn't play him (Clough) in the next round, otherwise we would lose our points, so we didn’t play him.” So then this season not only have Batley and Doncaster transgressed the DR rule it seems someone at the RFL omitted to warn these clubs that they would do so. It appears someone at Red Hall failed to do their job until the contentious games had actually been played and discover the rule had been broken. May I then put that case that if the failure of the RFL to properly enforce their rule a club, be it Keighley, Whitehaven or Batley are relegated and thereby lose thousands of pounds in revenue, the tenth club may be actually allowed to remain in the Championship.

Re: Batley - oh bugg*r .... : Mon Sep 01, 2014 4:47 pm  

Spot on Len.

I too was thinking the very same thing today, why should a 10th team be relegated when there has been such a dubious set of circumstances surrounding the DR points deduction.

The RFL should step forward now and agree to only 4 teams to be relegated this season, this issue wouldn't affect the outcome of those teams already relegated so it seems a very reasonable course of action imo

Re: Batley - oh bugg*r .... : Mon Sep 01, 2014 4:53 pm  

Lawkholme Len wrote:

If Dave Woods at Whitehaven states that last season the RFL informed them that by playing Paul Clough they would be lose points from the game (League Express page 3 14th September) “.....were told we couldn't play him (Clough) in the next round, otherwise we would lose our points, so we didn’t play him.” So then this season not only have Batley and Doncaster transgressed the DR rule it seems someone at the RFL omitted to warn these clubs that they would do so. It appears someone at Red Hall failed to do their job until the contentious games had actually been played and discover the rule had been broken. May I then put that case that if the failure of the RFL to properly enforce their rule a club, be it Keighley, Whitehaven or Batley are relegated and thereby lose thousands of pounds in revenue, the tenth club may be actually allowed to remain in the Championship.

Spot on Len I've heard someone at RFL has lost their job over this
Genuinely don't want. Keighley to go down but sadly were all in the mix
Good luck