gittinsfan

A good quiz question for the future LOL

Our local council car park has turned 4 parking bays into EV charging points.I was surprised to see that if you use one of the points you still have to pay the parking fee.Does anyone know if this is the norm,or is Gt Yarmouth council particularly moneygrabbing.

That's all fair comment, but if the grading system is to recognise the 12 strongest clubs then something went wrong.If Salford were to go into administration in say March the season would be a farce.

But surely,when this grading system is meant to determine the strongest 12 clubs.these low scores on finance should have raised red flags somewhere.

If the SKY money stays the same(or is reduced) do we still say don't worry this a twelve year project.

Yes and how many millions were invested in SL clubs,and look where we are now.

And obviously SL clubs invested many more millions brilliantly so that Sky decided to increase the amount,Oh hang on...

The tribunal notes make it perfectly clear that the club doctor did not sign off the player as fit.Therefore he could not play.The HIA timelines don't matter one iota if the player is not signed off.Aston was made aware of this but decided to play him anyway.

After reading this post I am assuming you have not read the tribunal notes from the original hearing.Also I assume you have not read the "Sheffield" post on the main forum. I suggest you read these two items.Then I sincerely think(or hope) that you realise this problem has got sweet FA to do with the Gameday Portal. Also in his article Mr Nicholas makes it very clear that the Gameday Portal has nothing at all to do with HIA protocols whatsoever.

Try the Batley site.

Numerous people are defending Aston,including other coaches and journalists.Apart from the tribunal notes,I have'nt heard any mention of Mick Heys the physio. At least this guy had the common decency to plead guilty.He also did'nt make the final decision. So why are'nt all these esteemed journalists clamouring for his innocence.Not enough headlines maybe.

That is a very good point.But would they appoint such a coach?

I would'nt have thought any coach appointed will be allowed much authority with Aston hovering in the background.

Of course not.I said that's what is wrong with DR.I used Wakefield as an example because we are on the Batley forum.

The thing wrong with DR is Wakefield will want some benefit out of this arrangement.If they want to send a player to us to gain match fitness and we say no,then they may not be so keen to help us when we want cover for injuries. Unfortunately we have to take the rough with yhe smooth.