Now Featherstone with 15!

[gingdong]

30 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Hull Sharks don't own a blade of grass, you're right. Hull FC do own a pretty large training ground though. There's lots of grass there.

I don't know why that matters, or why something that happened nearly 20 years ago matters, or why because it happened to my club it should mean I can't have an opinion on teams not being able to field a side. It's not hypocrisy at all. It would only be hypocrisy if I (or my club) didn't think there should have been a sanction for our situation. We applied to be relegated. What else could we have done other than just ceased to exist?

Again, we didn't have to drag him out of retirement. We chose to. We could have fielded someone who wasn't ready but had options. It was far better than leaving an empty bench spot. That should NEVER happen in a professional league.

I sense a degree of bitterness from Fev fans here. You can keep trying to throw stones and attack the messenger (and his club), but the fact remains that leaving bench spots open in a professional league is an embarrassment and it should be sanctioned (as should going into administration, etc). Don't try and deflect.

you fielded 15 at Wembley in 83 didnt you

[The Phantom Horseman]

2 hours ago, Scubby said:

 

If there was an operational rules fine of £10,000 for naming a squad of 15 or playing with less that 17 players in the Championship or SL - then none of this would have happened.

You're quite right. Fev would have named, say, Walton, Moore, Thornton and Wheeldon in the 19-man squad, sat two of them on the bench, and only used two of their interchange players. No rules would have been broken, nobody would have batted an eyelid and this thread wouldn't have existed.

[sentoffagain2]

12 minutes ago, gingdong said:

you fielded 15 at Wembley in 83 didnt you

  Fev will have more than the 15 but we will have to see which Leeds players are availiable after todays game against Hull K.R.,the fact that the players will not have trained with the rest of our team dosn't seem to bother those in charge of our club.Dual Reg is a curse.

[Scubby]

4 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

You're quite right. Fev would have named, say, Walton, Moore, Thornton and Wheeldon in the 19-man squad, sat two of them on the bench, and only used two of their interchange players. No rules would have been broken, nobody would have batted an eyelid and this thread wouldn't have existed.

Yep, I have said numerous times on this thread it is a look that has been harnessed right from the top down. If a club like Fev want to name 15 players without recourse then there is obviously no threat hanging over their heads. It just looks like we are amateur operation top to bottom.

[sentoffagain2]

  Forget borrowing players from Leeds we may as well take a couple from Fev Lions or Normanton the way Leeds tackled today.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

4 hours ago, gingdong said:

you fielded 15 at Wembley in 83 didnt you

Well, since I was born in 87, I have no idea. 

If we did, we should have been sanctioned if it wasn't a full squad.

Any other things to dig up?

[Scubby]

5 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Well, since I was born in 87, I have no idea. 

If we did, we should have been sanctioned if it wasn't a full squad.

Any other things to dig up?

Think it was a joke mate. Two subs in 83 lol

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Just now, Scubby said:

Think it was a joke mate. Two subs in 83 lol

I've no idea. I was only born in 87

[David Shepherd]

Speaking as a Fev fan, this is bloody embarrassing and symptomatic of the drift our club has experienced this year. 

We seem to have completely given up on the season since Blackpool. 

I'm just not going to cough up fifteen quid this weekend and watch a club going through the motions.

It'll be the first home game I've missed since 2012. 

[yipyee]

On 8/31/2018 at 8:33 PM, fev4evatiggerneva said:

Lads please do your research before talking b£##$cks on forums, weve released hock and holmes, holmes out for season and was going to huddersfield anyway, rest are injured and no dual reg available,Hull and leeds have been short on numbers this season and there 2 of biggest clubs in country. Game is on its backside.

When saints and Wigan and Leeds have injury crisis they blood their youth  catalan also the game isn't on it's backside just some clubs who are built on sand are! Liecensing tried to address these issues and dual reg was supposed to for lower level clubs...

[DoubleD]

4 hours ago, sentoffagain2 said:

  Forget borrowing players from Leeds we may as well take a couple from Fev Lions or Normanton the way Leeds tackled today.

You can have Luke Briscoe back!!!

[Adeybull]

3 hours ago, David Shepherd said:

Speaking as a Fev fan, this is bloody embarrassing and symptomatic of the drift our club has experienced this year. 

We seem to have completely given up on the season since Blackpool. 

I'm just not going to cough up fifteen quid this weekend and watch a club going through the motions.

It'll be the first home game I've missed since 2012. 

I've "liked" this post.  But in reality I am pretty gutted (for you and other sensible Fev fans) that it has come to this.  there is, in reality, nothing to like here.  Best wishes, mate.

[gingdong]

3 hours ago, Scubby said:

Think it was a joke mate. Two subs in 83 lol

lost on the new plastic fans

[gingdong]

1 hour ago, yipyee said:

When saints and Wigan and Leeds have injury crisis they blood their youth  catalan also the game isn't on it's backside just some clubs who are built on sand are! Liecensing tried to address these issues and dual reg was supposed to for lower level clubs...

yes licencing was great wasnt it wakey and cas play in stadiums not fit for purpose and wake have to train at fev because they have no facilities fit for purpose. licencing certainly addressed plenty of issues didnt it

[yipyee]

1 hour ago, gingdong said:

yes licencing was great wasnt it wakey and cas play in stadiums not fit for purpose and wake have to train at fev because they have no facilities fit for purpose. licencing certainly addressed plenty of issues didnt it

Wasn't given long enough...

If still going there would have been clubs lining up to replace failed bids!

[Spidey]

10 hours ago, Scubby said:

The couldn't they or shouldn't theys are probably irrelevant if the RFL operational rules came with some actual backbone. Because if it was a £10k fine we all know that Fev would have 4 players on the bench tomorrow - even if it was Pete Smith and Deryck Fox.

It does make it a farce. If it was me I’d name two of my injured players anyway with no intention of playing them. Naming 15 just makes Featherstone look amateur, for a supposed big club in the Championship

[Spidey]

5 hours ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

I've no idea. I was only born in 87

He caught a big one then

[gingdong]

7 hours ago, Spidey said:

It does make it a farce. If it was me I’d name two of my injured players anyway with no intention of playing them. Naming 15 just makes Featherstone look amateur, for a supposed big club in the Championship

if i was a betting man which i am, i would put money on fev fielding 17 today

[gingdong]

8 hours ago, yipyee said:

Wasn't given long enough...

If still going there would have been clubs lining up to replace failed bids!

do you really believe that?? Fev refurbished there ground in that time and built the best training facilities in the whole game. If the rfl followed there own rules we should of replaced Wakey or Cas who have done nothing. I very much doubt that would of happened however

[fev4evatiggerneva]

10 hours ago, yipyee said:

When saints and Wigan and Leeds have injury crisis they blood their youth  catalan also the game isn't on it's backside just some clubs who are built on sand are! Liecensing tried to address these issues and dual reg was supposed to for lower level clubs...

Obviously dont have much involvement in the game, rl cant survive on saints and wigan bringing youngsters through, amatuer teams are dropping at an alarming rate and with lots of clubs not running reserves if kids arent good enough after the 19s they go on the scrapheap. Ill leave my argument here and come back in a few year, cause all you sl fans have your heads in the sand, getting your sky money so everything is rosy, while the bigger picture isnt so rosy. 

[Robin Evans]

8 hours ago, yipyee said:

Wasn't given long enough...

If still going there would have been clubs lining up to replace failed bids!

How long is "long enough" to start developing a business.... rebuilding infrastructure and making grounds more spectator friendly?

Five years at wakey and nowt. Money spent mainly on the rugby element and not developmental throughout that entire period.. But for crusaders implosion they would have lost their place in SL....

So how long is long enoug? How long should we have waited to see development as licencing was sold to us?

[Wakefield Ram]

Regarding running reserves, Dewsbury ran a team successfully for a couple of seasons, but the lack of games meant they were disbanded. Until running a reserves side is a condition of being in the Championship, then clubs will continue to focus their income on the first team. Ending DR would help, the game has a long history of proper loan deals,  they give a bit of stability to the player and the team he is loaned to. Ending the massive disparity in central funding in the Championship would also mean less of an incentive to short termism.

[fev4evatiggerneva]

13 hours ago, David Shepherd said:

Speaking as a Fev fan, this is bloody embarrassing and symptomatic of the drift our club has experienced this year. 

We seem to have completely given up on the season since Blackpool. 

I'm just not going to cough up fifteen quid this weekend and watch a club going through the motions.

It'll be the first home game I've missed since 2012. 

What would you have liked the club to do the beggining of last season? Spend  less budget on a mediocre but larger squad and definatly not make the 4 seen as we were up against 4 full time squad and fax, or spend on a quality squad that could compete for the 4? We took the gamble and come up short of 2nd place by 1 point, we lost both 1st choice half backs for half a season, connor farrell who was the form back rower in the league for half a season, walton missed half the season, ulugia had a set back with his shoulder injury and never played all season, then we lost wilde for the crunch game against london, leaving us with 3 quality halfs in the stand, in a game we would have won with another link at half back and made the 4. So we took a gamble and were freakishly unlucky to miss out. Any team in the game would struggle without both 1st choice halfs for half a season, look at hull. With the 8s system you get about 500k for the 4 or 200k just over for 5th, so you either gamble or accept mediocre, we went for it were very unlucky now need to cut our cloth accordingly.

[Wakefield Ram]

2 minutes ago, fev4evatiggerneva said:

What would you have liked the club to do the beggining of last season? Spend  less budget on a mediocre but larger squad and definatly not make the 4 seen as we were up against 4 full time squad and fax, or spend on a quality squad that could compete for the 4? We took the gamble and come up short of 2nd place by 1 point, we lost both 1st choice half backs for half a season, connor farrell who was the form back rower in the league for half a season, walton missed half the season, ulugia had a set back with his shoulder injury and never played all season, then we lost wilde for the crunch game against london, leaving us with 3 quality halfs in the stand, in a game we would have won with another link at half back and made the 4. So we took a gamble and were freakishly unlucky to miss out. Any team in the game would struggle without both 1st choice halfs for half a season, look at hull. With the 8s system you get about 500k for the 4 or 200k just over for 5th, so you either gamble or accept mediocre, we went for it were very unlucky now need to cut our cloth accordingly.

Spot on, Fev took the gamble, as it always is in sport. A few seasons ago, a win against Bradford sealed their place in the 4. This time they missed out just and were extremely unlucky with injuries. But they are not going into administration, they will fulfill their fixtures and next season will have a much reduced budget and will probably be less successful. These things go in cycles.

[tim2]

4 minutes ago, Wakefield Ram said:

Regarding running reserves, Dewsbury ran a team successfully for a couple of seasons, but the lack of games meant they were disbanded. Until running a reserves side is a condition of being in the Championship, then clubs will continue to focus their income on the first team. Ending DR would help, the game has a long history of proper loan deals,  they give a bit of stability to the player and the team he is loaned to. Ending the massive disparity in central funding in the Championship would also mean less of an incentive to short termism.

Some points to make, as devil's advocate:

Running reserves is great as a way of keeping a handful of fringe first teamers match fit, but the rest make up the numbers and are typically taken from community clubs who then struggle for numbers as their best players are taken by pro clubs who have no intention of giving them proper contracts. The problem has been around in the community game for a while and now it's coming home to roost at semi-pro. No surprise this has got worse since funding to the community game was slashed.

The disparity in central funding does make the Championship two, or three, leagues in one and many games this year have been processions - especially in the second half of the season. However if you flatten the funding in the championship the gap to SL becomes too big.

If you do a "root cause analysis" all issues come back to money.