RP London

not quite.. it was included with the information about Cheshire.. even though it was described as between the Ribble and the Mersey.

Know what you mean. Dont mind parents too much, 1 grandparent but never really visited the country/still playing aborad or living here for 3 years etc seems a stretch though.

To be fair most people that you are discussing things with on this thread so far are big supporters of expansion so that doesnt add up. Out of interest, just looking at the formatting of your posts and the language you are using are you using AI to write/spell/grammar check your posts? not a slight if you are, I do it sometimes at work, just wondering as it reads like it, the formatting of the paragraphs etc look like it and the formatting in terms of changes in fonts and spacings to the regular forum posts look like it too.

Yes I know that but that's not the point of what is being said is it? Surely doesn't need to be spelt out that it's about where the money is being spent not what the company registration number is...

so you dont think that if they had carried on funding sheffield or newcastle to the same amount as they have Huddersfield that there may (stress may as we will never know) have been more to gain than the stagnation at huddersfield?

London were Wigan Highfield previously.. about to go bust so bought by the White City Stadium company to play games on a Wednesday night under lights.. players trained in the north and travelled down to play. Funnily enough they didnt last more than a season and moved back north to become Liverpool Stanley. Streatham & Mitcham and Action & Willesden then came around owned by Sydney Parkes who wanted to start a league of 6 teams in the south. asked the RFL for help, there was quite a lot of interest in the local areas but the RFL didnt help them out, expected him to sort out everything and hence it eventually fell away after 1 season (for A&W) and 1.5 season (for S&M). A trick was well and truly missed at that point, to have had a "Southern Rugby League" as it was called in the Daily Express, Mail and Telegraph at the time would have been an excellent expansion tool. They had got some good union players across (including George Nepia who was brought over by S&M) and could hold their own, finishing mid table.. so it was possible. But teams up and down what would become the M1 or M40/M6 could have joined that league or the precedent could have been set and a "midlands" league could have been formed.. the whole picture would have been so different. The fact major papers were covering this potential is something we wouldnt see now. The RFL not grasping the opportunities is a very long historical story and issue.

You dont remember the battle Sheffield had to get back in?? it wasnt a given that was going to happen. Plus the fact that we are able to be in the league with no money etc and look at the state of Huddersfield with all the money that has gone into them.. do you really believe that that money wouldn't have been better spent in Sheffield or Newcastle??? Hull have at least moved forward. Before anyone says it I know its Ken Davey's money and he wouldnt have spent it in Sheffield but there is also RFL money etc that went there that could have gone to Sheffield or Newcastle instead and potentially brought in a Ken Davey or better to one of those etc... Butterfly effect... the point being was saving Huddersfield at the expense of a Sheffield or Newcastle really in the long term interest of the game if it wanted to grow.. surely the answer is a massive no..

But how can it be that someone called "Anita Bath" is talking to a "Hallucinating Goose" and doesn't get the fact that maybe, just maybe, everything isn't 100% literal.

Actually the original post I responded too on here did not say "advisors", the word didnt appear in the post at all, it said "experts" which is a word you have constantly used on this thread to refer to IMG in a sarcastic way. Therefore it was hardly a "leap of faith" to assume you were having another pop at them. again I ask "How is what is happening at Salford anything to do with IMG if they have nothing to do with the licensing process anymore?"

check out clause 5.1 of the directors code of conduct, it can be found on the "board of directors" (the huge 3 man [yes just men] board) page as a pdf.. if only they'd read that 1 clause first!

How is what is happening at Salford anything to do with IMG if they have nothing to do with the licensing process anymore? Salford arguably wouldn't be in super league if the original criteria set out by IMG and the original weightings had been agreed to. Or are you saying that IMG should have stepped in and said "you know they're a basket case don't you? can you just kick them out otherwise our job or marketing this league is going to be much harder?" I mean I could understand that position a lot more as what you would like to happen, even though it would massivly overstep their remit.

Exactly, who'd have thunk it, specialists being used for the specialisms.

IIRC IMG do an initial "sanity check" of the data for the social media and, I think, the other interweb stuff so that there is one common reporting set up using data that is equal across the board. That is then submitted to the audit team. The Audit team, which I think is independent, then audits all the data that is sent to them to make sure it is correct and therefore the scores are correct at the end. This is an absolute box tick, they do not have influence on anything they are just checking that 25m clicks which equals 1 point (for example, cant remember what the actual points are awarded for) is actually what is on the spreadsheet etc.. (a bit like votes on britains got talent are independently audited).. they are just following the criteria that is given to them by the RFL and the clubs who voted for them (and changed them from the initial IMG ones).

I've been in plenty of these types of meetings with advisors and no matter the advice that is given, no matter the information that is given not everyone follows the sensible advice.. If you think they do you need to give your head a wobble. IMG came out with a set of proposals that were sensible and worked. These were changed by the clubs.. those are the facts.. the fact there was already a good set of grading criteria that did a better job than this does, including the grade demotion for financial issues (something you want) shows that they had a better grasp of this... then the clubs changed it.. it wasnt at that stage about advice, they gave them the criteria which the clubs then changed! IMG can only work with what the clubs give them at any moment.. the CLUBS gave them this issue with Salford becuase the CLUBS changed the criteria and then the RFL marked to that criteria. I am not defending the people that gave the reports on SRD... I dont understand where on earth you can get that picture from... for the 1 millionth time.. IMG ARE NOT THE PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE THEY DID NOT DO THE ASSESMENT. Those that are responsible are the RFL FFS! If we are here again next year its because the clubs and the RFL watered down the penalties that IMG PUT IN PLACE for financial misconduct. However many times you want to attack IMG for preparing the reports on SRD, you will always be wrong.

The experts did, even had a rule which catered for chucking a team out for financial issues (automatically a grade lower)... guess what THE GAME changed it. You can berate IMG all you want, you can hold the opinion that they don't know what they are doing, but you would be wrong. They set up a system, the clubs voted for changes that made the system unbalanced and toothless, that is on them no matter how many times you want to say "the experts don't know what they're doing" its the clubs that changed it to be like this.

I like that Leeds shirt.. more for what it is than the aesthetics. The Huddersfield one is a really nice shirt even without the great story behind it.

Its the speech bubbles... "you are the zebra"

actually no thats not what chatgpt would come up with if you put that in... its this Unfortunately now that I have posted that Derek will be launching this as the magic kit!

delete browsing history....

Back from a week in tenerife and I just used the standard google VPN that my Google Pixel phone had on it and hotspotted to that from my other devices.. easy

It's a company communication and they cannot get the where, were, we're correct...

Screw that, where, were, we're FFS, it's a company communication!!!!

I think it's a big problem outside RU, Football and Cricket (arguably) most other sport play as GB (Hockey being a notable exception but play as GB for the Olympics with only a few from the other nations)... GB has an argument around support for sure, also the fact GB is the country really... For me it's play as GB if we play the world cup amf every international as GB if not then go as the separate countries..

"Rugby League; we don't need paying fans"!

So far I have booked accommodation for both an RU international and the NFL in London in the autumn as I've known exactly when they will be for a while now. Will I do the same now for the RL??? If this announcement had been out earlier then that would have taken priority. It surely, therefore, is not tough to see where the issue is if you want to get a full house (or anywhere near). International RL once again shoots itself in the foot while claiming it missed..