Jump to content

PCarter

Coach
  • Content Count

    244
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

32 Excellent

Member Profile

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

741 profile views
  1. Is his employer a public service broadcaster?
  2. Public service broadcasters are obliged to follow certain codes as part of their licence. I find it bizarre that there is a watershed for 'moral' reasons, but that any suggestion that public service broadcasters should ensure staff wear a poppy when on air is met with such opprobrium.
  3. Gordon Brown flogged off all that expertise for a few quid. he also built a coal fired station at Kingsnorth. The French are 70% reliant on nuclear. Not aware of any fault lines in the UK and technology has moved on since Three Mile Island & Chernobyl
  4. No one is being denied any freedom. This is about broadcasters ensuring the correct protocols are observed during air time. What staff do when not on air and in their own time is entirely their choice.
  5. Nothing to do with personal choice. The newscasters are in work and it should be official policy to wear the poppy whilst on air. What they do when off air and at any other time IS entirely their choice.
  6. The BBC & other TV stations should ensure that ALL their broadcasters wear the poppy during screen time. What they then do when off air is down to them.
  7. Irrespective of any group latching on to this, ITV should ensure that, during broadcasts, it's staff wear the poppy. What it's staff choose to do when not working is entirely up to the individual. This isn't about giving money to charity, it's about never letting the symbol of the sacrifices made be forgotten or diminished. ITV has a responsibility to ensure it plays it's role in this.
  8. This is great news. Two outstanding young players who would walk into the 17 at any SL, club, yes even Wigan, have chosen t stay put where they are. How utterly pathetic of EW to blame George Burgess for England losing the 2013 RLWC semi. You could just as easily say it was Ben Westwood's fault for losing control of the ball in the act of scoring, or Kevin Sinfield for missing the conversion to Kallum Watkins try, or the referee for not giving Jared Wharea Hargreaves at least 10 for two deliberate head shots. It's akin to blaming Sam Burgess for England getting beaten by Wales, a game in which he did not concede one of the many converted penalties Dan Biggar slotted over. Two 23 year old lads who have come through the ranks & made it to the top level. They have 10 years ahead of them at the top level, that's 10 years when they can be around the England set up and add a significant contribution to the whole ethos. References to past greats are simply harking back to when they were all we had. If only the Hanley's Schofield etc had back up in numbers like these young blokes coming through, like Hill and Graham and Walmsley etc etc. How old is Chris Hill? Just to add a bit of context to his name being brought up in relation to the Burgess twins. When did he debut in SL and for England? We are getting real strength in depth, and what do some do? Whinge and whine about it. FFS Just imagine where we might be if, for example, ex Wiganers like Ford and Farrell had brought their boys through to SL level instead of taking the union coin?? Or doesn't that count EW?
  9. I think the RFL has done the wrong thing inviting Saints. They got hammered last time out and it was time to give another club a shot. For me, though it would have been a brave call, for the game as a whole Huddersfield needed to be given a go. They have earned the right to be invited to the top table. The lead time to the event gives plenty of time to sell the game and series. What a Launchpad for the club to sell itself and change perceptions of it's place in the sport. I've got no doubt such a decision would have made an awful lot of people sit up and take notice of what is happening in Huddersfield. A top NRL club coming to town is a whole different offering to engage support and sponsors. The game is poorer for sticking with the same old same old big 3 cartel.
  10. Isn't this just a case of Leeds getting him off the wage bill until he's ready for 1st team? If SL clubs had reserve grade, he'd never have been shipped out.
  11. As a citizen of the United Kingdom, you are a stakeholder in state owned assets. You do not have a shareholding in them. Basic capitalism, though this may well prove to be beyond your sphere of understanding. Door to door service will always be provided to those who want to pay for it.
  12. So it's basically pointless to have a league competition, it should be a crowd competition? How are clubs supposed to grow when the same few get these sort of fixtures? Were Huddersfield offered the chance to take part and declined? Perhaps having an NRL side come to town might just help change old perceptions of the Giants and the game in the town?
  13. The Royal Mail was not state owned prior to nationalisation. It was subject to state regulation.
  14. I think you need to learn the fundamental difference between shareholders and stakeholders.
  15. After being right royally stuffed by Souths last year, Saints might have a tough job to sell the Roosters fixture. With the lead time, I reckon Huddersfield could have pulled in a crowd not too dissimilar to what saints could achieve. How are we going to break the monopoly if decisions like this are made?
×
×
  • Create New...