RP London

Aml regs don't take anywhere near that long... Couple of days is it . Hiding behind AML is like people who hide behind GDPR because it's just a bit awkward or they can't be arsed to explain the actual rules that stop you accessing data.. AML is scary due to the punishments but really bloody easy if you look at it with a "wise" head.. Utter bullpoo and call them on it

If we're doing that then lets get a game at Bramall Lane.. the ashes was played there once (1902)

not a chance, that would mean planning and forethought and seeing the bigger picture.. (its a good idea so no chance it would happen!)

indeed, headingley is "up the road" for me but I will be looking at Wembley and Everton depending on the dates. Although to be honest I probably would if it had been elland road too, a weekend in London or a look at a new stadium is a pull, in fact a mud bath in a cow shed would be a pull over a trip to dirty leeds to be honest

you jest but we do seem to have a different shirt for the remembrance weekend test so the normal for the first test, remembrance for the second and a "throw back" for the 3rd.. fab!

I disagree as this has been 4 weeks from the start of the season not just 1 blip.. The RFL loosened the rules (wrongly) last week. If i sold our business and the buyer was sitting in the wings but I didnt pay the staff or loans then do people go "oh dont worry about it it'll be ok" or do I have to put the money in to keep the business afloat (its the latter). Yes it may work out ok but the way we are getting there is very very wrong. Salford should 100% have sold players to keep the lights on becuase there was no guarentee of if or when this take over would have happened and they should be planning better (or be forced to plan better).. again the scenario of selling the business (which we are in the process of looking to do so I've got a bit of experience here) you plan as if its not happening so that there is still a business here if a buyer doesnt come in or they fall away (as happens with many sales), equally to have something that is worthwhile to buy... the longer this all goes on the more someone may think, actually I'll wait, its about to go bust and i'll buy it out of administration.

The one thing I would say about the last paragraph is that if they sold a couple of players they would get a transfer fee, that could then have gone a long way to paying the wage bill for a few weeks while waiting for the takeover to come along, it would have also shrunk the wage bill. Selling the players would have been a wiser move than what they have done as it would actually have solved this situation. The money coming in etc would still come in, they would be a couple of star players down but is that such a big issue when there is no relegation? especially if the money means they get more points from the financials being better (1 or 2 increase) which would compensate the 0.5 or so they would lose on average league placings. Arguably a team without those players can still be a competitive team.

If Nigel Wood comes out in a baseball cap and ill fitting t-shirt to "advise" the RFL on how to keep the bills down I;m out..

Autumn internationals arent on terrestrial, think last year it was TNT which is more tucked away than sky

Cheers hadn't seen that... FFS.. the one bit I kept saying was only lift it when the debt has been paid it's not like I'm a genius just you could see this happening a mile away!! Serious questions to be asked of the RFL too for being pressure/fooled

Have they now said those debts haven't been paid? Haven't seen it but been busy last couple of days. They could clear those and still have no cash to pay players because they don't liquid assets (which should have been checking in due diligence)... Money laundering sounds good but the checks really are not that long so for me that's rubbish. The whole thing is a mess but was predictable.. just look at all the posts on here of people saying why we shouldn't rush it through and why due diligence was important.. but what do we all know??

I don't understand why you think I'm relaxed about this .. it's like you've not read the previous posts... I'm seething this has happened. I just don't necessarily agree that if you change the rules you fix the problem, they just get around that rule. Should they have been kicked out when they ran out of money? Yes 100%. Should the system have shown this? yes 100%. Their financials were woeful, does this show up the system? No I don't think it does, it shows up the poor choices we had to replace them. IF they could have solved the money issue earlier they have the other bits in the gradings to make them a very very good club which is what the gradings are aiming to find. I am far from "relaxed" I am however a realist. Yes they need to put in place something robust that is not subjective that solves this (liquidity test maybe but that can then be fiddled with by short term injections of money that the week after get withdrawn as they aren't guaranteed). Once you know the rule you need to get around you can get around it so that has to be heavily considered. In terms of who is doing the auditing, yes of agree someone like PWC should be involved, but I think IIRC there is more than just IMG/RFL doing this.

This has been gone over heavily already. I don't 100% disagree but I also 100% would argue that if that is the rule there will be a way to make that happen without it necessarily being true.. change the rule but people will find a way around the new rule IF they really want to. You cannot go back and say it would have worked because if you put it in place the butterfly effect theory says everything now changes. I think they need to tweak the financials but they need to have a look at exactly what they could look at that is not subjective, it cannot be a subjective "I don't think you can pay them in 2 months" it has to be objective. But they defo need to get that right. However, this was an argument had months ago and there's loads more detail in the discussions including financial implications and how you can get around things written by other people about this in the previous pages.

It can be asked but you were quite judgemental without having any facts and only asked afterwards for something that could be found... Which, ironically for the post you made just before this, seems on brand for the present political climate I suppose.

I hate to be a bit of an d*** about this but if you don't know how it works and what was incorrect how can you make a judgment on it? It's also hardly difficult to find out, top link when you Google "Salford red devils IMG score" is this https://www.salfordreddevils.com/salford-red-devils-publish-img-grading-breakdown/#:~:text=Salford Red Devils have been,announcement of our leadership restructure. Which tells you how it's broken down. Finances encompass turnover, revenue etc etc just because they have no cash or profit does not mean they have no income or turnover.. they are very very different things (and that's just the basics of the financial scoring). For balance sheet they literally get 0. Now you can argue balance sheet should hold more weighting etc and that has been done.. but you can manipulate some of this and that's why there are so many parts to each pillar as manipulate one part will effect another (is the plan anyway). The information is all out there though.

Not NFU just Northern Union or Northern Rugby Football Union at a push IIRC in terms of the rule changes I'm a big believer in the butterfly effect that if you change one thing in history all the rest probably changes too. However, the main driver for the rule changes was the fact you needed paying spectators to be able to pay the players, the more the players wanted the more spectators you needed. Therefore, you need a game that is exciting to watch... drop 2 players to open the pitch up, clean up the mess around the contest for the ball at the tackle, emphasise the try over the kick etc etc. Fast forward to today, RU needs spectators to pay the players, needs TV viewers, needs new viewers so what do they start to do? Speed the game up by cleaning up the ruck and maul (the difference between the speed the ball comes out today compared to the 90s even is massive). Emphasise the try by increasing its value to 5, bonus points for tries etc etc.. if they could drop the 2 seconds rows etc without it becoming RL I bet they would. A lot of the "mess" that looked terrible (contested scrums, contested lineouts, rolling long winded mauls) have been sanitised, lineouts with lifting means you shouldn't lose them and they should be "clean" so the spectator isn't sat there going "it's 15 blokes chasing a ball on the ground because they can't catch and they just wrestle over it". The rule changes for league were to make a spectator friendly sport and whether the Welsh clubs were involved or not I think they'd have happened. Would they be the exact same? maybe not as other voices may have had different ideas (look how America changed the rules to form a different spectator friendly game)... But equally, maybe, they'd have all seen the same rule changes as good and we'd be still exactly where we are, just with Welsh clubs and maybe some south west teams also being "heartlands".

I think your looking at "anti establishment" too much... RL wasn't anti establishment to its core it just happened to be because the establishment didn't want to give the northern clubs what they wanted .. they did give the Welsh clubs what they wanted and they would allow certain English clubs what they wanted too (south west/Welsh borders mostly). Why leave en establishment that is bending over backwards for you?

yep there is definitely an argument in that.

Thank god for that!

in short, there are loads that have come in and then gone back out again especially in the interwar period. An entire book could be written just on the teams that came in (trust me I started then life got in the way).. Not sure if there is one single point to find them, just going through year by year the tables will show you who is in and who is out. The welsh clubs joined en masse in 1907 forming a league of their own but it didnt last as the RFU shat themselves that it would mean the South West teams would leave so turned a blind eye to professionalism for the next 90 years.. London had a push in the 1930s wanting to form their own league but in the end only 3 teams appeared and then disappeared. Different areas have different books etc written about them

1. Will Wakefield score more than 2 tries against Hull KR? Yes 2. Will Hull v Wigan be a higher scoring game than Warrington v Catalans? No 3. Will Oldham score more points than Bradford? Yes 4. Will there be more than 1 away win in League One this weekend? yes 5. Will a drop goal be scored during this round of Super League fixtures? no Tie breaker: How many tries will be scored across all Super League games this weekend? 38

to be fair with the weather at the moment if someone said he was even "lukewarm" doing that I'd have to disagree..

I totally do not understand the thinking behind this weekend. In any job you really ought to be working through about 4-5 scenarios almost all the time, the "what ifs" otherwise in meetings you get caught on the hop which is a terrible look. Equally it means you have an agile business that allows for changes in circumstances (that you cannot control) not to impact you too heavily. Surely on any given week there has to be some agility around the fact that players get injured in training or come down with sickness.. Why is he making out this is some totally unplannable situation, it really isnt.

lets hope so for everyone's sake!