: Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:20 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

So? Who do you think supported the original Gateshead and the original Sheffield? Why, the RFL of course! But then they changed their agenda and decided that Hull was going downhill rapidly and so merged the Gateshead team with the Hull team to save Hull, and ditto for Sheffield with Huddersfield (I think it was). Gateshead were pulling in a few thousand in those early days but all those fans were just dumped by the RFL. The same is happening in South Wales. The RFL has changed its agenda - new stadia, new stadia, new stadia - and the fans in South Wales are being dumped. If the Crusaders move north I am fairly sure they will die. If they stay where they are, as they should do IMO, then they have a good chance of survival because a lot of groundwork has been done and once they start having some success on the field, the fanbase will grow. But all this uncertainty will do nothing for the chances of RL in South Wales. In fact, it just makes the RFL look like the bunch of clueless amateurs they are. I don't think for one minute the club would have considered moving out of Bridgend until they absolutely had to (to make way for a new stadium there) without the pressure from the RFL and their bloody new stadia agenda. Idiots.

The drive (nay requirement) for new stadia has been on the cards long before Crusaders were ever concieved. Keithley were famously denied entry into super league because of theirs. Crusaders as part of their license were going to get one sorted. Everyone else in the sport whose stadiums are not up to scratch are going through the exact same thing.

As I say, the rfl have bent over backwards for the crusaders. To blame them for anything is absolutely ridiculous.

: Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:25 pm  

Chris Dalton wrote:

The drive (nay requirement) for new stadia has been on the cards long before Crusaders were ever concieved. Keithley were famously denied entry into super league because of theirs. Crusaders as part of their license were going to get one sorted. Everyone else in the sport whose stadiums are not up to scratch are going through the exact same thing.

Yes, they are, and I think that is just as bad because we are in the middle of a recession and the last thing struggling RL clubs can afford is bloody new stadiums. The RFL should have relieved the pressure until the financial situation is better and so the Crusaders would not have felt the need to move before they were really ready to. But that would be to grant the people at Red Hall with some nouse, which they just don't have.

As I say, the rfl have bent over backwards for the crusaders. To blame them for anything is absolutely ridiculous.

You clearly didn't read my last post so your comment is worthless.

: Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:38 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Yes, they are, and I think that is just as bad because we are in the middle of a recession and the last thing struggling RL clubs can afford is bloody new stadiums. The RFL should have relieved the pressure until the financial situation is better and so the Crusaders would not have felt the need to move before they were really ready to. But that would be to grant the people at Red Hall with some nouse, which they just don't have.


You clearly didn't read my last post so your comment is worthless.

Are you on drugs ? it is not the RFL that are forcing anybody to move anywhere , the move to Newport is a Crusaders decision , probably to try to build a bigger fan base in a bigger town

: Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:59 am  

Hedgehog King wrote:

And he was given quite a bit of RFL cash into the bargain. Let's not forget that.

Who knows what the rfl has or hasnt done, but are you suggesting that the rfl put cash in samuels pocket or paid running costs for the club? big difference i would suggest.

: Wed Nov 25, 2009 12:08 pm  

Hedgehog King wrote:

Yes, you have. You still do.

oh ffs boo sucks to you too

You thought it was worth the risk and so presumably you are enjoying the current mess.

that makes so little sense i hardly know where to begin. How does accepting a risk lead to enjoyment of things going pear shaped? seriously what are you talking about?

Personally I don't.

I wanted expansion into Wales and it has seemingly been thrown away by reckless idiots.



Cliched rubbish, the game is enjoying a boom in non-traditional areas such as Essex (piece in the Independent last week no less).

It is also played in France, New Zealand, Australia, Papua New Guinea and the Pacific Islands and to some extent Spain, the USA, Serbia, the Cazech Republic et alia.

It would be nice for Wales to be on that list but it's massively overstating things to say that Bridgend or even Newport were the difference between survival and oblivion.

yeah cuz the aussis are so committed to internationl development. all they care about is holding there own with the afl in aus. png will go nowhere without investment. the pacific islands exist depending on whether the aussies can be bothered to let them play and the rest have such a febrile toehold they are entirely dependent on the UK suceeding. Fine i'll alter my prognosis: rl will die in its current form but survive as some weird aussie determined sport that no-on watches outside of aus. great, cant wait.

: Wed Nov 25, 2009 4:39 pm  

jannerboyuk wrote:

yeah cuz the aussis are so committed to internationl development. all they care about is holding there own with the afl in aus. png will go nowhere without investment. the pacific islands exist depending on whether the aussies can be bothered to let them play and the rest have such a febrile toehold they are entirely dependent on the UK suceeding. Fine i'll alter my prognosis: rl will die in its current form but survive as some weird aussie determined sport that no-on watches outside of aus. great, cant wait.

That's your view, however, you are just as wrong about that as you are about everything else.

: Wed Nov 25, 2009 4:40 pm  

jannerboyuk wrote:

Who knows what the rfl has or hasnt done, but are you suggesting that the rfl put cash in samuels pocket or paid running costs for the club? big difference i would suggest.

Sky money.....?

Development officers.....?

However much he got for the club, it would have been more with Crusaders in SL than in CC. Essentially he sold a SL place and little else. Where did he get the SL place from?

: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:36 pm  

Starbug wrote:

Are you on drugs ? it is not the RFL that are forcing anybody to move anywhere , the move to Newport is a Crusaders decision , probably to try to build a bigger fan base in a bigger town

You really do like being obtuse, don't you? The move to Newport was to facilitate a new stadium being built in Bridgend and it was part of the licence application. That means Crusaders had to be either in a new stadium by the three year deadline (max) or in another stadium until a new stadium was built. However, had the RFL eased off on its ridiculous demand for new stadia, especially at a time of quite awful recession, then the Crusaders could have stayed at Bridgend until such time as a new stadium was actually imminent, just as Saints are staying at Knowsley Road until their new stadium is imminent (although slightly different since Saints' stadium is being built at an entirely different location from Knowsley Road, hence logistically things are easier). However, the RFL have not backed off and the Crusaders' hand has been forced.

: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:47 pm  

SaintsFan wrote: You really do like being obtuse, don't you? The move to Newport was to facilitate a new stadium being built in Bridgend and it was part of the licence application. That means Crusaders had to be either in a new stadium by the three year deadline (max) or in another stadium until a new stadium was built. However, had the RFL eased off on its ridiculous demand for new stadia, especially at a time of quite awful recession, then the Crusaders could have stayed at Bridgend until such time as a new stadium was actually imminent, just as Saints are staying at Knowsley Road until their new stadium is imminent (although slightly different since Saints' stadium is being built at an entirely different location from Knowsley Road, hence logistically things are easier). However, the RFL have not backed off and the Crusaders' hand has been forced. http://www.islandfarm.tv/ Are you reffering to this ? , if so this is not on the site of Brewery field therefore it does not give the Crusaders any problem staying at Brewery field until it is built , the RFL accepted Brewery field last year and until the Crusaders outgrow Brewery field there is no reason they cannot continue there

SaintsFan wrote: You really do like being obtuse, don't you? The move to Newport was to facilitate a new stadium being built in Bridgend and it was part of the licence application. That means Crusaders had to be either in a new stadium by the three year deadline (max) or in another stadium until a new stadium was built. However, had the RFL eased off on its ridiculous demand for new stadia, especially at a time of quite awful recession, then the Crusaders could have stayed at Bridgend until such time as a new stadium was actually imminent, just as Saints are staying at Knowsley Road until their new stadium is imminent (although slightly different since Saints' stadium is being built at an entirely different location from Knowsley Road, hence logistically things are easier). However, the RFL have not backed off and the Crusaders' hand has been forced. http://www.islandfarm.tv/ Are you reffering to this ? , if so this is not on the site of Brewery field therefore it does not give the Crusaders any problem staying at Brewery field until it is built , the RFL accepted Brewery field last year and until the Crusaders outgrow Brewery field there is no reason they cannot continue there

: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:24 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

You really do like being obtuse, don't you? The move to Newport was to facilitate a new stadium being built in Bridgend and it was part of the licence application. That means Crusaders had to be either in a new stadium by the three year deadline (max) or in another stadium until a new stadium was built. However, had the RFL eased off on its ridiculous demand for new stadia, especially at a time of quite awful recession, then the Crusaders could have stayed at Bridgend until such time as a new stadium was actually imminent, just as Saints are staying at Knowsley Road until their new stadium is imminent (although slightly different since Saints' stadium is being built at an entirely different location from Knowsley Road, hence logistically things are easier). However, the RFL have not backed off and the Crusaders' hand has been forced.

If you read the RFL's notes on Crusader's licence, it said that it expected them to upgrade Brewery Field not to move.