Re: Say no to the name change : Sat Nov 13, 2010 5:29 pm  

ambernotyeller wrote:

An established rugby League team would not be allowed to just up sticks and move when it suits then, neither would they want to.

But it is ok for an established club to take the playing staff/coaches from an expansion club and for them to receive a fee for doing it?
The RFL have a history of making unpopular decisions but don't forget that it isn't always in the favour of expansion as much as it sometimes seem that way.
BTW FC fans this is in no way a dig at you i'm just making the counter arguement.

Re: Say no to the name change : Sun Nov 14, 2010 10:39 am  

BroncOnIon wrote:

Good luck Crusaders, whatever you end up being called. I suppose it's good news that there's another club to share the receipt of this sort of flak.

And all the cash handouts from the RFL at the detriment of real rugby league teams ............. remember blackpool ???

the expansion joke is a disgrace

Re: Say no to the name change : Sun Nov 14, 2010 2:28 pm  

ambernotyeller wrote:

And all the cash handouts from the RFL at the detriment of real rugby league teams ............. remember blackpool ???

Yes I do I also remember Hull FC and Huddersfield as well do you?

Re: Say no to the name change : Sun Nov 14, 2010 9:43 pm  

Roverswall wrote:

Yes I do I also remember Hull FC and Huddersfield as well do you?

yep another 2 disgraces that should be expelled from the top league, and these clowns dont believe its bent...............................................lol

Re: Say no to the name change : Sun Nov 14, 2010 11:08 pm  

ambernotyeller wrote:

yep another 2 disgraces that should be expelled from the top league, and these clowns dont believe its bent...............................................lol

I wouldn't call it bent more like consistant.
Both FC and Hudds are heartland but favoured.
Crusadres are expansion but favoured not a lot of diffrence.

Re: Say no to the name change : Mon Nov 15, 2010 11:30 am  

There were 5 clubs involved in those mergers, people should do their homework.

Re: Say no to the name change : Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:04 pm  

boomer wrote:

There were 5 clubs involved in those mergers, people should do their homework.

Where have I said there wasn't?
Does that make my point any less valid?

Re: Say no to the name change : Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:39 pm  

The club that got the best deal is the 5th, and is never mentioned Why are the other 2 or 4 a disgrace?