dboy

We can smile and be humble. Let's face it, we weren't 100% convinced it would ever happen ourselves were we?? The jibes stung at the time, but we are on the up and punching our way forward.

Play silly games, get silly prizes...

I haven't made an argument, I've stated a fact. The RFL award academy status on the merits of the club's application.

In time, yes, I bloody hope so, but happy with being a proper play-off team in the next 3 years. After that... Also, we have to measuring clubs on trophies - it's ridiculously finite. Competitive, stable, profitable, productive...

You are aware that the RFL decision on which clubs run academies is based entirely on the business and sustainability plans that the CLUBS submit in their applications to run an academy?? ###### clubs can't run academies.

So quite the definition of a sleeping giant then. Trinity are awakening. You sound bitter??

Yes, all those bad people thinking a competitor should stop spending their rent money on artificially pushing themselves up the league table.

Make your mind up. Is the stadium model for success own your own and take all the income, e.g. a Warrington, or is it to have a facility owned by someone else, i.e. stadium management group/council e.g. a Hull FC? Or a Salford. We will never see the French system you describe in this country. I'm not sure French localities are providing facilities to sports clubs without having a return on that expenditure.

The agreement says they must pay £450k per annum. They have only ever paid £150k per annum. Because the fail to pay £300k per annum, Salford Council has to pay it, as they underwrite the tenancy agreement. Three cheers for the tax payers of Salford! Fans forum re: stadium situation - Thu 8th July | (deviltalk.co.uk)

Devil is in the detail for Salford board who must prove they can achieve big goals - Matthew Shaw - YorkshireLive (examinerlive.co.uk) The writing has been on the wall for some time. I'd forgotten that the club were pinning their hopes on a government hand-out. The last line of the this June article is; "Time will tell if this is the right way to do it".

Only Salford could think paying the rent is negotiable!!!

Indeed. How many years is it now?

In what way has the ship been steadied? The "new regime" have been there for some considerable time and the club still spends more than it earns. The community input was a one-off fan-fleecing - or are they going to ask the fans to have another whip-round. The Special Measures doesn't put the council under pressure, it puts the club under pressure. If it's done to pressure the council, it's a very risky tactic.

All well considered. They won't win the CC, but will, I'm sure, be targeting the 1895 - not guaranteed by any stretch of the imagination. They will score extra for having the LED boards (not yet installed, but expected to be). They may improve utilisation based on the expected increased crowds, though the lower away support may hurt. They score extra on funding based on the % of owner income to central funds. The media is already through the roof on previous efforts - I have no bloody idea how that all translates to points though. Whatever they scored this year, it WILL go up next year.

1, Stop spending money you don't have on players then. 2, "Currently"??? Since you have been at Barton, you have NEVER paid full rent. It's not a problem that's crept up on you. 3, If you'd paid your rent all these years, maybe the council wouldn't have an issue with helping extending your lease?