What inactivity are Cas and Wakey guilty of? In what way does anything Fev have done outweigh what Cas and Wakey have done.? You make getting rid of a club sound easy. What about everything that comes with the club, as you point out. Players, staff, community schemes, supporters all abandoned via a very dubious decision making process.
Bradfords crowds may have dropped, but could Halifax, for example, ever hope to match the crowds Bradford get now or equal all the off field things the Bulls do?
How will dropping Cas and Wakey for Fev and Halifax improve on what is already there, using the 'best interests' points you make? How does swapping match reports from the Bradford T&A to the Halifax Courier mean higher media presence?
as i say they are all arguments.. none of which are worth going into again.. and if i were cas and wakey i would look over my shoulder.. that doesnt mean any of hte above were to happen but they are all possibilities and would make me nervous to be clubs that dont make headway.
So you are happy with the RFL whitewash?
my understnading is that there is an investigation ongoing.. i think the way it was handled was the best it could possibly have been handled given the situation yes.
At the time the story broke Craig Spence openly said the entire responsibility lay with the club. The RFL accepted no responsibility whatsoever for registering these players and not checking the visas were as required to play in the competition. This was of course a very strange thing for the RFL to say given that they had previously told Widnes that they could not register players because the visas were not the correct ones required. For your information, one person oversees these matters and is well known for being highly diligent. in my opinion that diligence level was deliberately lowered to facilitate Celtic Crusaders being allowed to bring in players to get them into SL Do you think it is in the best interests of the game for such a flagrant breach of not only immigration rules but RFL Operational Rules to go completely unpunished? Crusaders should have been expelled from the competition. Other clubs should also have been punished, but remember, none of them were being lined up for an SL slot. For your information the RFL did not carry out any sort of investigation at all. Why would the RFL investigate itself, not in it's best interests?
my understnading is different and that an in vestigation into it is ongoing.. companies do do that when they try to work out what went wrong and why.. if you have a true source that it didnt it would be interesting to hear.
The crusaders were punished as much as the others were punished so to ask for more is unfair. as it is as i have said the best was done that could be done.. they werent lined up for a SL slot they were in the SL already and the on field, if you remember what you have said before, is less important so why shoudl the fact they used them to get up the leagues actually be that importnat.. Yes they broke the rules in the Super league by fielding these players.. fine but in the past breaches of hte slaray cap are not punished severly by throwing teams out.. they are points deducted.. which i agree perhaps they should have had done but throwing them out would be a massive overreaction anhd in one fell swoop would have destroyed all the hard work done in wales. fantastic
Crusaders used six ineligible players who were deported. The RFL has not and never will take any action, which to me is a complete whitewash.
fine that is your opinion.. i agree deducting points may have een better.. but they should not have been thrown out that would be over the top to an extreme..
Wigan survived relegation by breaking the salary cap as have other clubs.. and not been thrown out.. it is in a different way as bad as they could not have had the same set of players if they had kept within the cap etc.
Celtic Crusaders were clearly not prepared for SL either were they??
they were arguably as prepared as any one else would have been.. Salfrod have hardly been pulling up trees..
Hull FC and Halifax committed exactly the same offence. What round it was in or when it was discovered is not relevant.
i've not mentioned the round.. WHEN it was discovered does make a difference though it was discovered after the matches for Hull and before the next one for Halifax, so direct action was able to be done, your annoyance was that "SL club gets a fine, Championship club has to cancel a game just hours before kick off and is thrown out of the competition.".. if the Halifax incident had not been found out before the gae they would also have got to play it and then retrospective action would have taken place.. as it was it would have been wholly irresponisble of the RFL to allow it to go ahead when they knew that it would be cancelled out and risk injuring players in a non game.. somehting they would have been castigated on here for.. damned if you do damned if you dont.
The same punishment should have been handed out to both clubs. Hull FC ended up making money from the experience. On the question of rules, there are plenty of precedents in not only the Challenge Cup but other RFL competitions of clubs being expelled for playing ineligible players. Hull FC should have been thrown out with the club they best in the previous round being given their spot, and any others beaten given financial recompense for lost revenue from at least one subsequent game. Comp[lete incompetence and lack of integrity from the RFL
there was not rule to break.. and that is how the RFL saw it and put a rule in place.. before hull who was the last team to be thrown out for not actually breaking a rule but breaking a spirit of a rule?
I agree they "should" have been thrown out but sadly there was a hole in the rules and thats the breaks..
so you want to put in the team they beat in the previous round.. fantastic.. what about the team before then who could have beaten that team had htey been given the chance?? thats not fair.. and what sort of financial recompence how do you work that out.. how far could they have gone etc.. Hull broke NO rule.
Regarding Harlequins, yet again you are happy for breaches of rules to be perfectly OK because it's an expansion club. The RFL should have told Lenaghan he had to relinquish his shares if he wanted control of Wigan. That deal should have been rubber stamped and in writing or no purchase of Wugan could take place. Just what is the point of having rules if at a whim they can be ignored? What does this and the Crusaders debacle do for the integrity of the sport? In my opinion it leaves it in tatters.
where did i say that becuase they were an expansion club they should be allowed to breach the rules??? dont put words in my mouth
i would say the same if it were the toher way around and that wigan were under grave threat if they forced leneghan to get shot before he bought quins..
The RFL are the guardians of the game and they have to do what they feel is right for the LONG TERM future of the game. This "integrity" you speak of is short term and easily forgotten about.. for a start if you speak to anyone outside of the game they wont give a hoot who owns quins or wigan and in fact couldnt tell you either.. they wont know they own both.. this whole debacle is internal.
The Crusdares mess was weel known but will be forgotten over time and success in Wales is more important than short term damage to the name.
your opinion is fair and is your opinion but you have to see that the RFL are doing what they think is right, they are expanding the game and if that doesnt happen then the whole game will regress.. that may be what some people want but it certinaly isnt what I or those involved at the RFL want.
i dont intend to continually repeat myself though as i feel i have done in the last few posts