M j M
-
Posts
11,990 -
Joined
-
Days Won
34
Posts posted by M j M
-
-
It was half suggested that Rowley rejected Leeds although I don't quite know how far it got given Blease could just have sent him a text asking if he may be interested.
Hull were rather more publicly and embarrassingly rejected.
-
New companies with no assets are entirely normal vehicles for acquiring another business so I wouldn't read anything into that alone. But there are plenty of other questions which need answering.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, fighting irish said:
I think its shameful when in effect, both the club and the RFL have colluded to allow this to happen.
Now they seem to be pointing the finger of blame at each other, content with the fact it's happened just as long as they can weasel out of any responsibility for it.
That's just shabby and the game deserves so much better.
No.
This isn't a "both sides are to blame" issue whatsoever.
-
11
-
-
19 minutes ago, Hopie said:
I haven't followed the complete story in the off season, but I am confused how they are able to keep players under contract but not play them, and as this is a new situation I can see there may need to be clarifications about how it works.
Why does this confuse you? It's standard practice, players only become live on the cap after they play a game. This isn't special to Salford, this is how the salary cap works. Leeds for example are paying Maika Sivo a fortune for the next twelve months but he won't play and won't count a penny on the salary cap.
The lower salary cap is peculiar to Salford because they showed themselves unable to pay their way when they asked for a funding advance before Christmas. But how the cap works is unchanged and shouldn't confuse a smart fellow like Rowley.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Hopie said:
1. What did he do to mislead? He wanted to bring in players from his first team squad that are too expensive under this reduced cap, he was unable to doit as it is against the current agreement with the RFL which they informed him when he tried to do it.
If Rowley didn't know how the salary cap works that is staggering incompetence.
If Rowley did know then he has been misleading.
Those are your two unpalatable options.
-
2
-
-
39 minutes ago, Dave T said:
So.did everyone start from scratch then after they moaned? Because Keighran had 2 x Grade B's last year and would have meant he was on 11 points and a match ban.
Seems like they did. Spineless.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Red Willow said:
Whilst not defending Rowley or Salford, but if the RFL agreed the team then how will they justify any action?
What did the RFL agree? Are we going to get bogged down in yet another misunderstanding, like with the Mark Aston case, of what the RFL accepting a squad listing means? Given Salford's situation there was evidently a check to see if the submitted squad was within the live cap. But what players clubs choose is ultimately the sole responsibility of the club in question. It's simply not the RFL's job to babysit clubs who are incapable of following basic regulations properly.
-
3
-
1
-
-
So have Hull KR gone back to reporting crowds again this season ?
-
56 minutes ago, Griff said:
On a point of order, the Challenge Cup only started in 1897.
The first draw for the competition was in 1896
-
2
-
-
40 minutes ago, langpark said:
FIFA World Cup? Among many others.
The Challenge cup has a lot of issues but the way the draw has been done for the last 129 years isn't one of them.
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, Just Browny said:
Why have we suddenly decided we don't like draws? I like draws.
It's something some Aussies and Kiwis have started asking for because they don't have a clue how a knock out competition should work, or how the cup draw is itself a point of interest and drama.
-
3
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Taffy Tiger said:
To be fair , on paper this was a good match for BBC .
From the Salford angle a team who's barely survived through the off season , now a new buyer has taken over , wiped clear the debts and they have a full squad to try and win at one of this season's top SL clubs . It's the 'fairytale ending' scenario .
What I personally hope doesn't happen is that the RFL back down on all of their checks and give into Salford by allowing them to name a full strength squad next week .
If all the checks have genuinely been carried out and met all the necessary requirements , then fair enough , otherwise RFL should stick to their principles and restrict Salford cap again for next week , and every week thereafter until the necessary requirement have been met .
If they do restrict again next week , then I bet Rowley won't name the same squad as he has this week and we will see a few more first teamers come into the squad , especially considering it's their first home game .
I hope they keep on restricting them even when they have finished the checks. Just to make a point, as apparently that's what squad selection is all about now rather than wanting to win games. I'd definitely keep it for one more week, that would work well for all parties.
-
31 minutes ago, UBranger said:
They knew the score re. Salford, surely they could of asked BBC to swap the game due to the circumstances. Maybe they did, personally I don't think it is good promotion of the game. Hope you enjoy it though, each to their own.
You think the RFL should have asked the BBC to completely change the BBC 2 schedule at two day's notice?
And you think the BBC would have said, "yes that's easily done".
Is this really the planet you inhabit?
-
1 hour ago, Hopie said:
There's annoyance, and there's the overreactions seen on this board over recent months.
I wish Salford well and hope to see a resolution and return to normality.
Nah, there were lots of us who had a lot of goodwill towards Salford who can see what Rowley and his club have done here is utterly pathetic.
-
12
-
-
2 hours ago, Click said:
Can any Leeds fans tell me why Handley is apparently now more suited to being a centre?
All of his skill set seems to transfer into being a winger.
I don't think anyone knows why Arthur thinks this is a good idea, especially now Sivo is done for the year.
-
1
-
-
Very harsh on Cas that, I'm glad it didn't come back to haunt them.
And what a shame Rhyse Martin has lost his kicking ability
-
23 minutes ago, Segovia Carpet said:
I think all you anti Salford posters should understand the position before commenting & condemning the club.
The position is they are deliberately putting out a ridiculously weakened team.
Why is that worthy of anything other than condemnation?
-
3
-
-
2 minutes ago, Click said:
Can't they use SKY's big screen at the ground? Wouldn't that also have a clock?
Just sayin'
Don't think that was working either.
-
3 minutes ago, Red Willow said:
Its frustrating to say the least. The RFL could have done more to clear the take over, but it is a petulant move by Salford in a game with a potential audience on BBC.
Hate it is my club yet again being talked about in this way.
We have no evidence the RFL could have cleared the takeover more speedily. Four or five working days is a pretty short time to do the sort of work they need to do all the fit and proper tests, especially if the new owners are potentially somewhat contentious on that front.
-
7
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Pigeon Lofter said:
If I was a Salford or a Saints fan, I wouldn't waste my time or cash on attending this fixture, and I expect many thousands to stay away. It's not "Super League", it's a shambles of a contest. I won't even bother watching it on TV, because this isn't "the great game", is a parody of the game we support.
So, a scratch team, a poorly attended stadium , and a non-contest on national terrestial television on the seasons opening weekend is a dreadful look for the game. How much further will the image of the sport sink because of this debacle?
Salford are getting a lot of stick, but the RFL is as incompetent as ever in how they are handling this.
Time to change who oversees the game in the UK, the RFL aren't fit for purpose.
How on earth are you twisting this to blame the RFL? It's Salford who have caused all the issues leading up to this point and it's them who have deliberately picked a joke of a squad when they could have fielded a pretty decent side.
-
14
-
-
5 minutes ago, Agbrigg said:
You are correct. But why are RFL being pedantic too. This situation is like a room full of squabbling kids. The RFL could be the adult in the room and look at the good of the game and it's wider perception. We are launching SL for the season and showing a live game on terrestrial TV , so we dish up a non event. Only the RFL could have allowed this, no other top sport would sit back like pedantic jobs worths.
The RFL are restricting them to a £1.2m salary cap.
Salford are putting out a £150k team.
I think there are questions to be asked, but they are mostly to be directed towards Salford and Rowley.
-
5
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, Padge said:
I thought home sell out obvious, only tickets available are in the away allocation, all available home tickets have been sold.
What else could it mean.
So it's Leigh not pulling their weight for this one.
-
I've been minded to defend Salford through most of it as they were just doing what they had to do to survive until things got better.
But this just seems deliberately destructive, for no benefit at all.
Moreover, given the positive news about the takeover last week and how bad 2025 Saints look, I'd already put £5 on them to win this weekend
-
2
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:
My lasting memory of Nigel Wood will always be of a discussion I had with him in 2020 where he said the one rule change he would want to see in RL is the removal of a knock on as an infringement. I was kind of lost for words
I believe this is a Sadler idea isn't it?
Wakefield Trinity plans submision
in The General Rugby League Forum
Posted
What's going on with the roof ?