Re: Wakefield 's New backer : Sat Sep 18, 2010 5:34 pm  

It was lower than that, and it's planned to even lower next year, and therefore we spend the least in super league.

Does jk really wanna sign the non descripts we've been linked to? No of course not! The crud were getting is the best we can get!!

Re: Wakefield 's New backer : Sat Sep 18, 2010 5:38 pm  

If it was up to Kear we would be signing Thurston and Ingles and players of that ilk but we have to be realistick and realise that we don't have the money to compete financially for signings with many if any of the clubs in super league.

Re: Wakefield 's New backer : Sat Sep 18, 2010 5:40 pm  

mwildcats wrote:

It was lower than that, and it's planned to even lower next year, and therefore we spend the least in super league.

Does jk really wanna sign the non descripts we've been linked to? No of course not! The crud were getting is the best we can get!!

No it wasn't! But you are right in that next years will be lower.

Re: Wakefield 's New backer : Sat Sep 18, 2010 5:40 pm  

That's much higher than I would have thought, whichmakes this seasons efforts look much worse!! If anyone were to have asked me I would have said we were shy of £1M. Don't ask me what based on, just a best guess!!!!!!

Re: Wakefield 's New backer : Sat Sep 18, 2010 5:42 pm  

TRB wrote:

No it wasn't! But you are right in that next years will be lower.

Well it was very close to the bottom figure... Either way it's low v low...

One wonders whether we'd have been able to afford Newton, tronc's and broughs wages this year and if we could what state would we be in now?!

Re: Wakefield 's New backer : Sat Sep 18, 2010 5:45 pm  

mwildcats wrote:

One wonders whether we'd have been able to afford Newton, tronc's and broughs wages this year and if we could what state would we be in now?!

Fantastic point because i imagine the combined wages of Cook, Rinaldi and Leeano are far lower the Brough's, Tronc's and Newton's.

Re: Wakefield 's New backer : Sat Sep 18, 2010 6:01 pm  

Watching tonight's game goes a long way to answer the questions posed on here, Mason, Griffin, Brough, Westy, Solo, Atkins and to some respect Kirmond.

Re: Wakefield 's New backer : Sat Sep 18, 2010 6:45 pm  

The Trip wrote:

Watching tonight's game goes a long way to answer the questions posed on here, Mason, Griffin, Brough, Westy, Solo, Atkins and to some respect Kirmond.

the board sold them and kears on the bod them to blame

Re: Wakefield 's New backer : Sat Sep 18, 2010 6:50 pm  

MOPSEY LIVES ON wrote:

the board sold them and kears on the bod them to blame

We know the board sold them, but they all had to be sold for finnancial reasons or because they wnted to win things and they all felt that they couldn't at Wakey.

Re: Wakefield 's New backer : Sat Sep 18, 2010 7:04 pm  

Things will be different at Newmarket.
If we are in SL then we have the great facilities needed to attract players, sponsors, backers and fans, oh and satisfy the RFL. With on-site training facilities second to none.- Who wouldn't want to be a part of that?

However if we are in the championship then any bod has a great location to rebuild and reclaim our rightful place back in SL. The RFL will have 3 years of looking at our complete project, wishing they gave us more time in comparison to the ongoing slow death of RL in London. With NM professional RL can continue in Wakefield, while that remains a return to the top flight would always be possible.

Running a SL club from BV was a task of biblical proportions and it very well maybe that in the end it was impossible to do.
The game changes on the 22nd of October.

No matter how dark the clouds are now, the future remains VERY bright for RL in Wakefield.