RP London

interestingly in the post telling us all how someone else should have spent their money without knowing their full circumstances there were 2 really important words.. Calculated Risk. The person whose money it was calculated the risk not to be enough to take and that really should tell us everything we need to know. What I would find interesting was if he had all his money back, and was about to go in and invest again with the idea that off the field investment is perhaps more important in terms of Super League places etc would that risk calculation change. ie he would spend the same but on the off field and therefore have a better club, a place in super league (or if not a more sustainable club), and now be reaping the reward. IMHO after dealing in risk for many years the risk profile is less as it is at the moment than it was with P&R due to the number of variables that can occur "on the pitch".

DP

Dont think its that far off what is happening at Salford to be honest... none payment of wages, people supposedly about to buy the club etc... but still very cloak and dagger and thats with journalists that understand how to do their job.

Just look at the utter debacle at Sheffield Wednesday at the moment...

No, they wouldn't bring him, their own governance rules say.... oh hang on... oops

This is exactly why I would task each team with an expansion area that is theirs and theirs alone. BUT they have to put in x amount of money to develop it, play at least one home game in that area too. build an academy which then feeds into their normal "local" academy. Really task them with it. From that you see a tie into people supporting that super league team from that area (having their own one is not necessarily relevant as we can see in people supporting teams from all over the place in other sports). But developing, eventually, a league one/champ club is the long term goal, but each area will develop that over different timescales and that is fine. The ONLY way these clubs will buy in is if you force them too, the only way we can spread the money there is if we get the clubs to buy in. The RFL dont have a pot to urinate in at the moment, but this can benefit the clubs as they are forced to start finding and bringing through talent from new areas and a nice virtuous circle can then start.. and it will. But without forcing them to do it the clubs are unlikely to "risk" cash that could be spent on a nice pie and pea supper.

probably my biggest bug bear when expansion is spoken about is "we've done it before and it hasn't worked there." When have we ever "done it" anywhere properly?!? just dropping a team into the league and hoping to god it will work is not "doing it"... The only time I have seen anywhere near "doing it" was when there were DOs around London and it was working... losing those lost a lot of momentum in the junior/community game.. and even then I wouldnt say that was "doing it" really.

funny you should mention this.. ChatGPT recons Bristol Brigands

Their bill is due as soon as the funds are available.. ie they need to pay now... but the next meeting to wind them up ie final due date, is September.. They're not wasting their time waiting simply a month to then go through the same rigmarole again they give it a little bit of time before they want another serious chat, but they still want their money soonest.

Its like walking into Currys and getting annoyed you cant get root vegetables. Then moaning to everyone that Currys is a rubbish shop.

To be fair Rhinos might be accurate as most have got the horn... its a bit hot for a coat but I'll grab mine anyway

For me, if I became Lord of the RFL, I'd carve the country (big population centres) up into 12 or 14 (whatever big Nige decides) pieces and hand them to each club. It would be their responsibility to develop the area. Get kids playing with camps and they would come under the clubs banner. The "new areas" can play each other as development regions. Best kids would automatically start to be picked up by the clubs that run the areas and can end up in their academies early on with the hope they may actually end up running 2 academies one in the heartland and one in the development area. Therefore bringing juniors through in those areas. Maybe even looking at the possibility of a "league one" club springing up there int he future that can be used as a "development team" for the super league club. The clubs will fall into line if they can see that they can actually benefit massivly from it, have a salary cap exemption for players coming through that pathway etc. They can invest in it and they have sole usage of those players up until a certain age, 21 when they are free to move to another club like any other player (or the club decide to release them younger and they can sign for another academy). some clubs are already doing some of this with scouting in these regions and helping development IIRC and some players are coming through but they could do more and all clubs should be doing this.

Yep thats something I cannot get my head around either. As you say someone may have stood too it themselves or (and this is highly unlikely and I am sure would make not a jot of difference to the loan company) there is a memorandum of understanding that is very watertight on purchase of something like the land and they have some recourse to that.. but I cannot see that being very likely.. its all very odd.

The only way I can make it "make sense" in my head is that HMRC will wind them up before the end of the season. The loan company will not. That buys them extra time to find more funding if they are massivly short, sell assets to fund it (other parts of their "group") or sell land if they have managed to buy any off the council, or buy the land off the council at which point they can then mortgage that at a better rate and pay off the bridging loan. None of those options really make much sense, they are flawed and illogical and some may not actually work anyway but I am really struggling to get any further than those.

Wakefield Trinity Wildcats Hull Sharks There's been some doozies.. Could go with London Lickspittles.. would show to the established clubs they are prepared to bow and scrape to their superiors which will go down well with those "in power".

TBF while teams pulling out is never great at least they have given some notice rather than pulling out late in the week, means the potential that you dont have to buy the food/can find a replacement team. These things happen but, as I say, early in the week is much better than later.

I love the "well they did it too".. that's irrelevant to whether Aston is guilty or not.. it's like a burglar caught red handed saying "yeah but John did it too?" Ok then John also gets prosecuted but so do you. There may be other issues, the RFL certainly are not exempt from blame on points and they are working to correct them (I have said this from the start of you want to go back and look) but none of that exempts aston from blame or exempts him from a ban. He did wrong, if he held his hands up, realised he cocked up etc his ban wouldn't have been as long (look at Mick Heyes for that).. the RFL admit they can do things better hence they have made changes.. Yes the super league club should also be investigated and IF found to have committed similar offences then similar punishments should be handed out, if they don't it's a poor look, but it doesn't mean Aston is any less guilty..

except he was not the "designated club doctor", she was and it is the "designated club doctor" who needs to do this. In the same way as a company has a dedicated Health & Safety officer who is the final person that has to sign off documents, even if someone in the company has done more courses than them that doesn't matter. She is named as the person that needs to sign this stuff off, she did not do that, that is a clear breach of the protocols, whether that suits your argument or not.

except the doctor had not signed him off which is the final test.

exactly

so you dont think the original case of someone not following return to play protocols and playing a player that was not ready to play was serious enough to have a tribunal case against? further prolonged time away from the game/work (which is what happened here IIRC), Nero degenerative issues can increase, Second impact syndrome (rare) can kill you https://www.return2play.org.uk/concussion/#:~:text=Prolonged symptoms – sometimes referred to,Back to top These are important protocols and are taken seriously for a reason.

I believe that is the new process as the coaches cannot be trusted to act like responsible adults and follow simple rules. Every concussed player is now locked in a different cupboard depending on which part of the return to play protocol they are on and they move to a different, lighter, cupboard as they move through the protocols. the quality of the cupboards and their capacity vs an average of the previous 3 years worth of club concussions will be added to the IMG gradings for 2026, some clubs are now hastily building extensions to their cupboards.

Got to agree with the last paragraph. Aston acted against the best long term interests of the players. The coaches role has developed more so than ever to a custodian of the players long term health and wellbeing and there are now strict rules and procedures around that. Procedures put in place to hold coaches to account and to make sure the players are kept safe because the coaches cannot be trusted to not make the decision based on the desire to win (or for some preserving their job, if the next loss could see them sacked, and that's understandable in a way hence the procedures are needed). He broke them, he did not look after a player in his charge properly. He should simply take the punishment and move on IMHO (and looking at the club at the moment I think move on maybe in more ways than one).

I bloody hope there isnt similar drama, not sure I could take it... lets just hammer them

I am absolutely steeling that analogy!!