: Wed Mar 04, 2009 4:55 pm  

Standee wrote:

wish it was all over, sick to death of it.

Ditto.

Bird will play for Les Cats in the UK (my opinion of course )

: Wed Mar 04, 2009 4:55 pm  

Stan Butler wrote:

Pish off then

Up yours!!!!!!!!!

: Wed Mar 04, 2009 4:56 pm  

Chris28 wrote:

Not enough to outweigh the general rules in my experience

thats fair enough, but you cant argue its not different, when it is, then say it would make a mockery of the system if an application was made which was accepted when one which is different has been rejected, even if in your experience it isnt enough

Good point. I would hope that the UKBA would at least attempt to be consistent, otherwise why refuse the original visa? If I'd gone to the trouble of refusing a "bad lad" in Australia to "protect the UK" I'd be annoyed if some doofus at an airport didn't at least check up on the reasons for the refusal and not just overrule my decision.

surely his next application should be judged on its own merits, not on the decision previously made (even without getting into the differences)

and in SL only, we can see numerous examples of people worse than bird being allowed in, if the news reports are to be believed and it is only the change in interpretation in canberra that has changed, and everywhere else is the same, you would expect him to be allowed in would you not?

He would fall to be refused for the same reasons - nothing has affected the reason for the original refusal (if it was for what we think )

im not asking whether he would or wouldnt, im asking whether or not you would think it made a mockery of the system to allow him over here to compete in the 4nations, but not allow him to move over here

Olympics over RL? I can't really see this being a political issue at the highest level tbh, but I take your point

im sure the French politions wouldnt mind scoring a few points out of it, it would surely be easier politically just to let him in and have done with it

: Wed Mar 04, 2009 4:58 pm  

Standee wrote:

so, by your argument, FC could set up a business in France, register Crocker to it, and he'd be free to play in every SL game.

Yeah, right.

If Hull FC traded out of, and were registered in france, and crocker lived in france, worked in france and was paid in france,

then yes

but then you would simply have moved hull fc lock stock and barrell to france, even crocker isnt worth that much

: Wed Mar 04, 2009 4:58 pm  

Gordon Gekko wrote:

Up yours!!!!!!!!!

Fairy muff

: Wed Mar 04, 2009 5:19 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

thats fair enough, but you cant argue its not different, when it is, then say it would make a mockery of the system if an application was made which was accepted when one which is different has been rejected, even if in your experience it isnt enough


surely his next application should be judged on its own merits, not on the decision previously made (even without getting into the differences)

and in SL only, we can see numerous examples of people worse than bird being allowed in, if the news reports are to be believed and it is only the change in interpretation in canberra that has changed, and everywhere else is the same, you would expect him to be allowed in would you not?




im not asking whether he would or wouldnt, im asking whether or not you would think it made a mockery of the system to allow him over here to compete in the 4nations, but not allow him to move over here



im sure the French politions wouldnt mind scoring a few points out of it, it would surely be easier politically just to let him in and have done with it

The purpose of his stay is different yes, but the same rules have to be considered and if he doesn't meet them, the purpose of visit doesn't even come into it. In my view inconsistency in relation to one individual in a short space of time (refused in Feb - admitted in March) is a mockery of the system, but I don't think we'll ever agree on the terminology

The next and all future applications will be judged on their own merits, but the same factor will come up as originally, so must be taken into consideration. Once it is no longer a factor it can't obviously, be considered.

I wouldn't put it past the Immigration Serice to let him in but if the original visa was refused for the reasons we think, I would expect a professional organisation with the systems and ethos they have to be on the ball and refuse him entry.

The circumstances will be different for the 4 nations so he may qualify. It's a moot point.

: Wed Mar 04, 2009 5:50 pm  

Ellam wrote:

Can't we buy Crocker a house in France and then bring him in on friday morning and fly him back on Sat night.

It would be added to your cap as payment, a tent might do it though

[Kosh]

: Wed Mar 04, 2009 5:53 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

he has a valid french work permit and a job in france,

Irrelevant.

SmokeyTA wrote:

he is only likely to be over here for a few days which would be devoted to RL,

Irrelevant.

SmokeyTA wrote:

he would be able to supply testamonies from the french club and i have no doubt the mayor of perpignan or similar

He had testimonials from Bradford, the support of the RFL, and I think some local luminary or other as well. Didn't help.

: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:24 pm  

Kosh wrote:

Irrelevant.

Irrelevant.

where, how, and why he is attempting to enter the country is irrellevant to whether he should be allowed to enter the country?

what a strange thing to say

He had testimonials from Bradford, the support of the RFL, and I think some local luminary or other as well. Didn't help.

how do you know it didnt help? surely you of all people wouldnt be mixing up correllation with causuality would you?

: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:27 pm  

May as well scrap the salary cap then if they can bring any bugger in who cant get a visa here,makes a mockery of the game and and the RFL have bent over and let the frogs well and truly roger em.