The Phantom Horseman

It really wasn't. It was shoehorned in on the end of a discussion about the fixtures , with your own take on whether Fev will return and a strange demand that "the fans need to demonstrate there's a demand for the club", which suggests you haven't been paying attention to what the fans have been doing recently. Fev's return or otherwise isn't dependent on the fans, it will be down to the wishes of whoever ends up controlling the land, and of course the RFL if an application to rejoin is made. My thoughts on the fixture list are nothing to do with my own team (which doesn't exist!) and they won't change if we return next year.

I wasn't "taking offence when the obvious was pointed out to me", it was just a complete non-sequitur at the end of a discussion about something else. I don't know any Fev fans who need the club's financial failings and recklessness pointing out to them, indeed I was hinting at it on this forum three years ago (though obviously I had no idea of the extent of it).

You can spin it as much as you like, but any league that has clubs playing some teams twice and others not at all is hugely flawed when there's a big disparity between the strongest teams and the weakest teams, that's my view and I know it's the view of quite a number of other Championship fans. As for your last 3 sentences...I'm not sure how you've got there from the topic we were discussing, other than that you know I'm a Featherstone fan and you were determined to slide something in about our currently non-existent club.

Yes we did, and for almost all of that period we had one division. Shall we go back to that too, and have (for instance) NW Crusaders, Workington, Goole and Swinton playing against Leeds, Wigan, St Helens and Hull KR? Just because we used to do something doesn't mean it's right for the modern game. Unlimited tackle count, kicking out at the play-the-ball, no substitutes etc etc. Ok, strictly speaking that's correct, I was using it as shorthand for "a system that doesn't involve each club playing each other home and away". If 2 teams playing each other 3 times is unsatisfactory, I would suggest that teams some teams twice and others not at all is even more unsatisfactory.

Well, we abandoned the planned phased Championship move from 14 to 13 to what would have been 12 - after just one year. And part of the reason we moved to 14 SL clubs was supposedly the desire to bring an end to loop fixtures - which we then imposed on the Championship with steroids.

I think generally the women's game doesn't attract big crowds other than for big games involving the top 2 or 3 teams, and as Fevrover says, Fev fans would have been much more likely to go and watch the likes of Josh Hardcastle & Johnny Davies playing for Lions less than half a mile away.

Well, there's an element of luck of the draw in terms of when teams play each other ie you might play a team that's out of form, or struggling big-time with injuries, suspensions etc. Having a competition where teams play some teams twice and other teams not at all isn't luck of the draw, though, it's an unbalanced comp by design.

Indeed, and both teams had the opportunity to rack up the points, because in that season each team had to play each other home and away. Contrast that with the ridiculous fixture set-up this year, where, for example, play-off contenders such as London, Widnes and Newcastle all get to play NW Crusaders twice, whilst fellow play-off contenders such as Barrow and Oldham don't get to play them at all. It's farcical.

This ^ and also, I haven't seen any video footage of the game but I'd be pretty sure the fans that would be there would be in the main stand (they don't open the main terracing or family stand etc for these games) so presumably the video camera would not be pointed at the fans anyway?

Nothing to do with the referee. York were just about the better team on the day, but close to the finish we had a great chance to win it, 10m out and Ben Reynolds lined up in the pocket in front of the posts for a drop goal attempt, but Connor Jones passed out to the right instead and we bombed the scoring chance.

Really weird that HKR didn't challenge the possible knock on by Wakefield from the high kick with 2 mins left, then challenged an obvious high tackle 30 seconds later. I know the latter was just to slow things down, but if they win the earlier challenge, they win the game.

Well done to the team today, getting off the mark by beating Barrow 16-10. There are a handful of teams in the women's game who are much stronger than all the rest and realistically today's game was the best chance our ladies had of getting a SL win (there are only 8 teams in the league) so its great to see them do it.

I doubt Jimmy's going to be retiring to a Caribbean island any time soon.

4th club in two months, having played for Goole, Sheffield & Cas during that time. It's a merry-go-round these days.

Here's the timeline as far as I can tell... Monday 18 May Johnny Davidson puts up a story about Tim Holmes leaving Widnes and includes the phrase "The RFL declined to comment on whether the club was in special measures or not when approached by rugbyleaguehub.com Long Reads." There didn't seem to be any rumours about special measures prior to that story. Thursday 21 May Widnes chairman holds a Q and A for fans at Halton Stadium. James Gordon, presumably quoting the chairman, says on X in his report from the meeting "A potential investor turned away last week because of the false reports." So a report from a fairly obscure journalist on Monday had caused a potential investor to pull out the previous week? Any credible investor would surely be getting his information from the club not a journalist, and would be asking to look at the books etc. This just sounds like something you'd say when you were a bit aggrieved about a false comment.