dboy

"Grade A & B must not have an Insolvency Event as defined in Insolvency Policy. Downgrading of the club’s grade by one level i.e. from A to B for the year following the Insolvency Event."

That's a relief. Salford tax payers will sleep easier. Maybe over the preceding decade they could have kept a lid on it by not spending more than they earn and not signing players they can't afford? Just a suggestion of course.

Spend more than they earn, including on high-profile players. More money going out, whilst not even meeting their current bills (loan repayments and rent), than coming in.

As admin locked the last Salford thread because some Salford fans complained that people were upsetting them with facts, is it ok to mention their latest bailout or not? Salford council gave Red Devils £315,000 in 'immediate' financial support - Manchester Evening News

Carter certainly wasn't a big fan of overseas teams, whether that extended to wanting them gone from the league is a different matter. Of course, Carter is now gone and we don't know what Mr Ellis' views on the subject are.

"Bartercard enables businesses to exchange goods and services without using cash or cash equivalents or a direct swap." There's an irony in here somewhere...

Two separate things to be fair.

Agree 100% with the first bit, but were WMDC a barrier to Cas developing Wheldon Road???

You are right that Cas have owned their own ground throughout and should have invested in it properly, but don't be gloating about your gifted ground. Hilton Park was not good. That's the nicest thing I can say about it. And 15 years isn't the same as 25 years, is it. Not even in Leigh.

Yeah, like Leigh did?

No, should have been pulled up for that. Can do without a LF, but not a 2nd rower instead.

Well, I have to say, I hope you are right! Powell's job is to keep the players feet on the ground, I guess.

Nah. Someone will raise their game, Wakey will lose focus, grass too long, studs too short, loss of form, food poisoning, opposition fans playing trumpets outside team hotel before cup final...it's sport!

As a Wakey fan, I don't think we'll go unbeaten this season. I do hope we'll get it right in the 1895 Cup and the end of season play-offs though.

I said... "A knock-on is a technical infringement; thumping someone is a foul. Not comparable. Two thumpings = pen against #1 thumper." How do you find that as suggesting a scrum decision? I didn't even comment on the specific incident, just the point of Law in RL. If you'd read the post properly, you'd see I'm supporting the point you made originally. Please don't complain to Admin.

You didn't give an "extreme" example, you gave a wrong example. It is, however, hard for the ball-player now = play as quick as you can/as quick as you've earned (and risk being penalised)...or don't play it because you know you have been interfered with (and risk not getting the advantage you have earned)... Cue Mr Bentham...

A knock-on is a technical infringement; thumping someone is a foul. Not comparable. Two thumpings = pen against #1 thumper.

I will balance my distaste for SRD 2024 though... They left the old ground on the premise that they were to be gifted a new stadium, all-singing, all-dancing, primacy of tenure, with ready-made income streams. A bright future. What they ended up with is killing the club! How that deal was negotiated and agreed is beyond comprehension. Had Mr Wilkinson passed by then? I can't imagine he'd have let the Barton deal stand as it does.

Bradford certainly were a sham, but they do seem to have got back on an even keel. Newcastle are victim of circumstance and geography - a merger with Hull FC may be in order (to save FC). Wakefield aren't a sham. Mr Carter's stance of only spending what the club earned was undoubtedly both a blessing and a curse. A curse because we weren't truly competitive, and a blessing because it stopped the club going under. They didn't invest in the ground because they didn't own it - WMDC owned it and they failed to invest in it (you know, the one you think has done the club favours). Carter paid all debt's in full, from the previous CVA (like the one SRD defaulted on and had written off), and eventually managed to secure ownership of the ground (once Mr Box, Leader of the Council, and a Cas member, left WMDC).

But you're telling me I'm "negative", whilst you're "critical"? SRD fully deserve negativity and criticism.

I've been highly critical of what my club has and hasn't done. Of course I'm negative about SRDs business model - there is nothing to be positive about. If you're bored with this, I assume you'll stop trying to defend the indefensible.

Hardly. I'm not critical of Cas. I'm well aware of the barriers faced and overcome by my club. It's odd that you reference a benevolent council - they weren't benevolent until a certain council leader left - and their subsequent "benevolence" amounts to £2m (also offered to Cas and Fev), and the expectation that they will now act as they should have done over the previous 20 years. Nothing changes that fact that SRD are a sham club. I DO hope that they can turn it around and build a sustainable business model. I hope ALL clubs are run like that.

It's community owned in name only - unless you all received registered share certificates? No. However you think you are structured, in what world does it give you the right to not pay your bills and to keep sponging off the tax payers of the City; to keep taking on debt and to keep failing to re-pay it and to instead pay for top level players whom you can't otherwise afford? Your club is a sham. I do hope you get it sorted though (that's the point that you can't see, because you just can't tell the difference between criticism of your club and what you interpret as bad-will towards your club).

Let's assume all 700 SRD season ticket holders are also happy with it. That just leaves the other 257, 300 to check with. Pal.