championship 2019

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

6 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:

Yep, and as LTS will tell you, these are also limited by the DR regulations to players who have already made a number of appearances for the "lesser" club.

I agree that it isn't fair, but when has anything in RL been fair?

The minimum games rule (5) now only applies to eligibility to play for both the parent and DR club (in separate 8s)*. It would appear that as long as a player has been DR'd before the deadline he can play for the 'lesser' club, as long as he hasn't made an appearance for his parent club after that date. Existing loans can be extended after the deadline but not made. If a loan player plays for a club after the deadline he can't then play for his parent club if the loan period ends or he is recalled.

*IIRC when the current flavour of DR was introduced a player could only play for one club after the deadline and also had to have played in 7 or more games for the DR club to be eligible for them. I think this was then reduced to 5 and later the 'play for both' rule was introduced, initially with a 7 game minimum + clubs in separate 8s

[DOGFATHER]

On 8/23/2018 at 2:57 PM, Blind side johnny said:

I understand and also agree with your irritation RB but the RFL isn't an autonomous body; it can act only with the agreement of its members, the most influential of whom are the SL clubs. The RFL didn't embark upon this season with ANY plans for a change in the structure in mind. It was the SL clubs, led by a small group who, part way through the season decided they didn't like the eights so appointed a new CEO to develop a new strategy based specifically upon their own needs. This is one of the results of that, not a case of the RFL moving the goalposts arbitrarily.

...

My comments have so far been based upon the facts that have been released.

The trials and tribulations of Bradford, the RFL and the other Championship clubs have been discussed to death. If you refuse to believe all of the facts that emerged from that then there is no convincing you of anything.

 

Here is another "so called" fact that has been released.

In your opinion, Is Elstone a lying, or is this a fake news story?

http://www.totalrl.com/elstone-denies-super-league-interference-in-rfl-structure-proposals/

On your other post:-

Having re-read your post, I'd just like to clarify, I don't believe the RFL are behind this move to promote Bradford at all costs. It is far more likely IMO, that the SL clubs are wanting them promoted and back in SL as soon as possible, but they can't do it without the RFL.

The thing I have against the RFL, is not having the bottle to tell the SL clubs to just get lost. To my mind the RFL hold all of the trump cards. They have the infrastructure (of sorts) to run the game, the SL clubs don't and even with the SKy money they couldn't release enough money to run the game effectively from scratch.

Yet the RFL seem to listen and the tail seems to be wagging the dog a lot of the time. I understand that the Sky deal is with SL not the RFL, but without the RFL there is no game.

It is no secret that many of the SL clubs are on their uppers. Why wouldn't they want a team with a large following in the division to bring in extra revenue and increase gates, and probably more importantly viewing figures?

I understand the SL clubs point of view and I can see why they would move heaven and earth to make it happen. Apart from the extra money through the turnstiles. The game may attract extra viewers to Sky and thus improve the bargaining power for the next TV deal, not to mention becoming a more attractive proposition to potential sponsors. Hence why they want them in ASAP and hopefully competitive with 10k+ spectators turning up every week and many more watching on Sky.

On the face of it, from a commercial point of view, it would be better to have them in SL than say Salford or Widnes. However, it is the damage to the integrity of the game that seems to be overlooked every time they make one of these farcical moves. Remember Sheffield/Huddersfield and Gateshead/Hull mergers or changing the structure to 3 division when Keighley and us should have been promoted.

FWIW on the article above, I wouldn't trust Elstone as far as I could throw him or his cronies Moran, Lenaghan and McManus.

[phildog]

Regarding Summer Bash, wouldn't be surprised to see it go, even though SL Magic Weekend will stay of course. Case of big kid spoils the party....can't have the little uns having too much fun now can we? Out to damage every outside SL to the max.

[DOGFATHER]

3 hours ago, phildog said:

Regarding Summer Bash, wouldn't be surprised to see it go, even though SL Magic Weekend will stay of course. Case of big kid spoils the party....can't have the little uns having too much fun now can we? Out to damage every outside SL to the max.

To be honest, I think you are in a minority Phil regarding the bash. Every season, the attendance figures have been poor at best and getting worse. Do we really need another derby game, or a fixture which skews the league making it unfair?

For example, the bash has had a huge bearing on the final league positions this season. It could be argued, that 2 clubs missed out on the top 4, or two clubs only made them, because of the Bash fixtures, depending on your point of view.

People are complaining about the lack of interest in the CC Final today. I realise we are always going to struggle to get big gates with an overseas club in the final. However, it doesn't help the final attendances, as we have so many of these away day trips that we never had in the past, like the Bash, GF's as well as trips to Toulouse and Toronto now a days. People only have a finite amount of money and it could be argued that people are choosing these events over the traditional trip to Wembley and hence why we are not getting sell outs any more.

[Blind side johnny]

9 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

 

Here is another "so called" fact that has been released.

In your opinion, Is Elstone a lying, or is this a fake news story?

http://www.totalrl.com/elstone-denies-super-league-interference-in-rfl-structure-proposals/

On your other post:-

Having re-read your post, I'd just like to clarify, I don't believe the RFL are behind this move to promote Bradford at all costs. It is far more likely IMO, that the SL clubs are wanting them promoted and back in SL as soon as possible, but they can't do it without the RFL.

The thing I have against the RFL, is not having the bottle to tell the SL clubs to just get lost. To my mind the RFL hold all of the trump cards. They have the infrastructure (of sorts) to run the game, the SL clubs don't and even with the SKy money they couldn't release enough money to run the game effectively from scratch.

Yet the RFL seem to listen and the tail seems to be wagging the dog a lot of the time. I understand that the Sky deal is with SL not the RFL, but without the RFL there is no game.

It is no secret that many of the SL clubs are on their uppers. Why wouldn't they want a team with a large following in the division to bring in extra revenue and increase gates, and probably more importantly viewing figures?

I understand the SL clubs point of view and I can see why they would move heaven and earth to make it happen. Apart from the extra money through the turnstiles. The game may attract extra viewers to Sky and thus improve the bargaining power for the next TV deal, not to mention becoming a more attractive proposition to potential sponsors. Hence why they want them in ASAP and hopefully competitive with 10k+ spectators turning up every week and many more watching on Sky.

On the face of it, from a commercial point of view, it would be better to have them in SL than say Salford or Widnes. However, it is the damage to the integrity of the game that seems to be overlooked every time they make one of these farcical moves. Remember Sheffield/Huddersfield and Gateshead/Hull mergers or changing the structure to 3 division when Keighley and us should have been promoted.

FWIW on the article above, I wouldn't trust Elstone as far as I could throw him or his cronies Moran, Lenaghan and McManus.

All good points DF.

Elstone is a political animal and what he says is quite true, it is what he doesn't say that is more interesting. My claim was that this proposal comes about because of the SL clubs determination to end the eights. In other words it is caused by SLE but they played no part in devising it; hence, Elstone is correct but evasive.

What isn't mentioned by anyone, probably because they are still negotiating, is the future of P&R between SL and the Championship. I believe that the C/C1 group insisted on there being a straight one up-one down system, accompanied by a play-off between the SL 11th team and the C 2nd one (Sky love the "Million Pound Game" concept). As I say, no word has emerged about this.

I also agree that it drags the integriy of the game through the mud but this is entirely caused by the SL clubs hurry to get things changed before next season.

Many people do say that we should tell the SL clubs to go hang, but that would be a suicidal move for the whole sport unless we want to revert to a totally amateur game; a reversal of 1895, in fact.

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

11 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

 

Here is another "so called" fact that has been released.

In your opinion, Is Elstone a lying, or is this a fake news story?

http://www.totalrl.com/elstone-denies-super-league-interference-in-rfl-structure-proposals/

On your other post:-

Having re-read your post, I'd just like to clarify, I don't believe the RFL are behind this move to promote Bradford at all costs. It is far more likely IMO, that the SL clubs are wanting them promoted and back in SL as soon as possible, but they can't do it without the RFL.

The thing I have against the RFL, is not having the bottle to tell the SL clubs to just get lost. To my mind the RFL hold all of the trump cards. They have the infrastructure (of sorts) to run the game, the SL clubs don't and even with the SKy money they couldn't release enough money to run the game effectively from scratch.

Yet the RFL seem to listen and the tail seems to be wagging the dog a lot of the time. I understand that the Sky deal is with SL not the RFL, but without the RFL there is no game.

It is no secret that many of the SL clubs are on their uppers. Why wouldn't they want a team with a large following in the division to bring in extra revenue and increase gates, and probably more importantly viewing figures?

I understand the SL clubs point of view and I can see why they would move heaven and earth to make it happen. Apart from the extra money through the turnstiles. The game may attract extra viewers to Sky and thus improve the bargaining power for the next TV deal, not to mention becoming a more attractive proposition to potential sponsors. Hence why they want them in ASAP and hopefully competitive with 10k+ spectators turning up every week and many more watching on Sky.

On the face of it, from a commercial point of view, it would be better to have them in SL than say Salford or Widnes. However, it is the damage to the integrity of the game that seems to be overlooked every time they make one of these farcical moves. Remember Sheffield/Huddersfield and Gateshead/Hull mergers or changing the structure to 3 division when Keighley and us should have been promoted.

FWIW on the article above, I wouldn't trust Elstone as far as I could throw him or his cronies Moran, Lenaghan and McManus.

At least one SL 'owner' doesn't seem to want The Bulls back (at least under their current management):

“I’d like to know whose money he used to buy Bradford, I’d like to know exactly what investment he’s put into that club.

“It wouldn’t surprise me to learn the club was bought out of its own central distributions with little, if any external investment. The governing body have singularly failed to explain what’s got on during that club’s years of multiple ownership and wasted resources and from what I can see from here the picture today is no less murky.

“Of any club, that’s the club that’s had the most stays of execution, and are still there, and everyone would like the Bulls to come back in a very strong way!

“But I anticipate that there will be a resistance to the Bulls, while the man that owns, or purports to own the club is behaving in such a disruptive manner."

[DOGFATHER]

Which chairmen has stated the above LTS? 

My guess would be Hudgell at HKR, it is akin to one of his rants, but I do not know.

 

 

 

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

1 hour ago, DOGFATHER said:

Which chairmen has stated the above LTS? 

My guess would be Hudgell at HKR, it is akin to one of his rants, but I do not know.

 

 

 

You won't be surprised to know that your guess is correct.

[Dogstew]

On 8/25/2018 at 9:27 AM, Blind side johnny said:

All good points DF.

Elstone is a political animal and what he says is quite true, it is what he doesn't say that is more interesting. My claim was that this proposal comes about because of the SL clubs determination to end the eights. In other words it is caused by SLE but they played no part in devising it; hence, Elstone is correct but evasive.

What isn't mentioned by anyone, probably because they are still negotiating, is the future of P&R between SL and the Championship. I believe that the C/C1 group insisted on there being a straight one up-one down system, accompanied by a play-off between the SL 11th team and the C 2nd one (Sky love the "Million Pound Game" concept). As I say, no word has emerged about this.

I also agree that it drags the integriy of the game through the mud but this is entirely caused by the SL clubs hurry to get things changed before next season.

Many people do say that we should tell the SL clubs to go hang, but that would be a suicidal move for the whole sport unless we want to revert to a totally amateur game; a reversal of 1895, in fact.

Points well made here about ‘the truth’, announcements and omissions. The press conference that these guys held was a case in point - noise about change and stability but nothing concrete, and plenty to speculate on.

As for ‘interfering’ in structures, that is what Elstone has been brought in to do. They might even get off the pot soon.

[Keep The Faith]

This weeks RLE paper says meeting to take place for voting on next years stucture is 14th of September... that’s 6-7 weeks before pre season starts  how can clubs sell sign players, season tickets/sponsorship and other things without knowing what they are gonna be playing next season.... RFL & Certain chairman need to sort their ego’s out and sort it out because rugby league is down in the dumps at the moment! Are we having 14 teams or 12 or even 16.. it’s all down the chairman vote next week 

[phildog]

My point Dogfather re; Bash wasn't really to support it or denegrate it, but trying to point out that a) due to the first league re-organisation we lost our big day out at the NRC Final, b) clubs lost revenue by losing those round robin fixtures c) we lost the play-off semi-finals and d) we are about to lose the 8's where good championship sides get a crack at woeful (Widnes) SL sides. By we, I refer to the Championship sides not Batley in particular. We are heading back to the days where SL was a closed-shop or at least tightly monitored in an effort to deny the Championship anything to play for.  To even consider a structure change at the end of 2018 season makes a complete mockery of clubs' financial planning and recruitment, but does that bother SL? Not one bit as long as they're alright Jack. There is an awful smell hanging around Rugby League just now and unpalatable decisions are being made by a dozen men on behalf of 40 clubs.

[DOGFATHER]

15 hours ago, phildog said:

My point Dogfather re; Bash wasn't really to support it or denegrate it, but trying to point out that a) due to the first league re-organisation we lost our big day out at the NRC Final, b) clubs lost revenue by losing those round robin fixtures c) we lost the play-off semi-finals and d) we are about to lose the 8's where good championship sides get a crack at woeful (Widnes) SL sides. By we, I refer to the Championship sides not Batley in particular. We are heading back to the days where SL was a closed-shop or at least tightly monitored in an effort to deny the Championship anything to play for.  To even consider a structure change at the end of 2018 season makes a complete mockery of clubs' financial planning and recruitment, but does that bother SL? Not one bit as long as they're alright Jack. There is an awful smell hanging around Rugby League just now and unpalatable decisions are being made by a dozen men on behalf of 40 clubs.

a). I'm not sure I understand what you mean by we lost our big day out at the NRC. We beat Widnes and enjoyed one of the best days of being a Batley fan in living memory.

b). The first couple f seasons they did, when teams used those games as pre-season friendlies. But after we won it, every team started to take the competition seriously and it really seemed to gain momentum.

 c). Was this the one against Halifax, during Harrison's last season with us? If it is then, that is why the playoffs are a bit of a farce to me.

d) I've never liked the 8s concept. It makes the league pretty pointless imo. I hate the fact, that a team finishing 8th could be crowned champions. We also see it most seasons where the best team (league leaders) are ravaged by injuries once we get to the playoffs and fall apart. Teams get a crack at SL opposition, but not really on an equal footing. SO teams need a massive amount of outside funding to even getting close to competing. 

I'm not sure if you saw the article in today's RL press about the new structure, but from my understanding, if the CH clubs stick together, they can out vote the SL clubs. Whether they will or not, is another matter. It might also come to the point that SL break away and take all of the money if they do. 

The deal published, with a 14 team CH division and 1 up 1 down, sounds far better than what we have tbh. It might at least mean we are not playing Dewsbury every other week, which has become a very stale fixture.

The only things that worry me about the proposals are:

The CH needs to guarantee a decent amount money throughout whatever TV deal is agreed, (so the gap between SL and rest isn't so big). It would also help CH teams to provide real competition to the bottom 4 of sl, maybe even stop the yoyo effect between divisions and also help SL clubs survive if they are relegated.

I'd also want the money to be evenly distributed between all of the CH clubs. Therefore we do not have a division within a division, so to speak. Like we have had this season and last, where there is such a disparity between the top and the rest.

However, I'd be surprised if it happens...

Those at the top want to keep a pecking order. IMO, the article below highlights what is wrong with the game. 

Super League clubs are keeping the sport going and deserve right to a bigger say

Craig Murdock says clubs face a difficultly in agreeing on a way forward for the game but Super League sides have a right to have a big say.

Hull FC owner Adam Pearson and Hull KR owner Neil Hudgell

There is a place for everybody in rugby league, but everybody must know their place too.

It’s a sentiment which a number of clubs should remember when the game’s leading men meet next week for an extraordinary general meeting which could decide the immediate future for our sport.

After all the arguments over the structure of the sport and the disagreement between Super League clubs and Championship sides over whether a 14-team second tier and getting rid of the Super 8s is good for the sport, everyone will meet to vote on the future.

I understand this is a tricky one and there won’t be a resolution which will be satisfactory for all parties.

I don’t want to lose clubs like Keighley and Hunslet and they have a role to play in our great game, but likewise many of the lower league clubs need to recognise that it is the Super League sides and their chairmen who are pumping their own money in to a far greater extent which is helping to keep our game going.

 

 

I wonder if he felt the same way whilst HKR were in the CH? Or if Hull were in Widnes' shoes this season?

 

[Blind side johnny]

15 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

a). I'm not sure I understand what you mean by we lost our big day out at the NRC. We beat Widnes and enjoyed one of the best days of being a Batley fan in living memory.

b). The first couple f seasons they did, when teams used those games as pre-season friendlies. But after we won it, every team started to take the competition seriously and it really seemed to gain momentum.

 c). Was this the one against Halifax, during Harrison's last season with us? If it is then, that is why the playoffs are a bit of a farce to me.

d) I've never liked the 8s concept. It makes the league pretty pointless imo. I hate the fact, that a team finishing 8th could be crowned champions. We also see it most seasons where the best team (league leaders) are ravaged by injuries once we get to the playoffs and fall apart. Teams get a crack at SL opposition, but not really on an equal footing. SO teams need a massive amount of outside funding to even getting close to competing. 

I'm not sure if you saw the article in today's RL press about the new structure, but from my understanding, if the CH clubs stick together, they can out vote the SL clubs. Whether they will or not, is another matter. It might also come to the point that SL break away and take all of the money if they do. 

The deal published, with a 14 team CH division and 1 up 1 down, sounds far better than what we have tbh. It might at least mean we are not playing Dewsbury every other week, which has become a very stale fixture.

The only things that worry me about the proposals are:

The CH needs to guarantee a decent amount money throughout whatever TV deal is agreed, (so the gap between SL and rest isn't so big). It would also help CH teams to provide real competition to the bottom 4 of sl, maybe even stop the yoyo effect between divisions and also help SL clubs survive if they are relegated.

I'd also want the money to be evenly distributed between all of the CH clubs. Therefore we do not have a division within a division, so to speak. Like we have had this season and last, where there is such a disparity between the top and the rest.

However, I'd be surprised if it happens...

Those at the top want to keep a pecking order. IMO, the article below highlights what is wrong with the game. 

Super League clubs are keeping the sport going and deserve right to a bigger say

Craig Murdock says clubs face a difficultly in agreeing on a way forward for the game but Super League sides have a right to have a big say.

Hull FC owner Adam Pearson and Hull KR owner Neil Hudgell

There is a place for everybody in rugby league, but everybody must know their place too.

It’s a sentiment which a number of clubs should remember when the game’s leading men meet next week for an extraordinary general meeting which could decide the immediate future for our sport.

After all the arguments over the structure of the sport and the disagreement between Super League clubs and Championship sides over whether a 14-team second tier and getting rid of the Super 8s is good for the sport, everyone will meet to vote on the future.

I understand this is a tricky one and there won’t be a resolution which will be satisfactory for all parties.

I don’t want to lose clubs like Keighley and Hunslet and they have a role to play in our great game, but likewise many of the lower league clubs need to recognise that it is the Super League sides and their chairmen who are pumping their own money in to a far greater extent which is helping to keep our game going.

 

 

I wonder if he felt the same way whilst HKR were in the CH? Or if Hull were in Widnes' shoes this season?

 

My understanding is that the SL cubs have agreed that the rest of the teams outside of SL will still receive the same proportion of whatever brodcast deal is negotiated from 2022 onwards. How that is distributed within those clubs is not really a concern of the SL clubs.

A 14 team league would be much better as a Championship - the fine detail needs to be worked out quickly. The structure of C1 is more difficult.

The reasons for a severely staggered distribution was to allow those clubs who finished in the top four to compete reasonably in the middle eights. If the eights are done away with then that distribution is no longer justified. Hence, i expect that the money earned by the clubs from their relative success in 2019 to be more equally distributed, although not completely flat, or that would mean there was no incentive for success.

Finances will still not be equal: some clubs generate much bigger crowds or have backers with deeper pockets. These are simply facts that cannot be legislated against.

Finally, much as we supporters of lesser clubs might find it difficult to digest, the "product" of SL is what attracts the broadcasters and most of the sponsors. Those clubs quite rightly receive the lions share of the money generated and deserve to have the loudest voices.

[DOGFATHER]

11 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:

My understanding is that the SL cubs have agree that the rest of the teams outside of SL will still receive the same proportion of whatever brodcast deal is negotiated from 2022 onwards. How that is distributed within those clubs is not really a concern of the SL clubs.

I had read somewhere that Rimmer had requested this, but I thought it hadn't been agreed to yet?

A 14 team league would be much better as a Championship - the fine detail needs to be worked out quickly.

Totally agree, I might even go as far as 16 teams personally, to have 30 games like we do now, including the 8's.

Maybe they will bring back the NRC to make up the extra fixtures though?

Or a 9's tournament might also be worth a try? It would certainly give the RFL another competition to sell to maybe bring in extra revenue and exposure. It might also give teams that have missed out on the league something else to focus on? 

The reasons for a severely staggered distribution was to allow those clubs who finished in the top four to compete in the middle eights. If the eights are done away with then that distribution is no longer justified. Hence, i expect that the money earned by the clubs from their relative success in 2019 to be more equally distributed, although not completely flat; that would mean there was no incentive for success.

I hope you are right, even when we finished in the top 4, the distribution just didn't sit right with me. The disparity was just far too great it just doesn't seem right that we got 3 times more from central funding than you did and you were somehow supposed to compete.

Finances will still not be equal: some clubs generate much bigger crowds or have backers with deeper pockets. These are simply facts that cannot be ligislated against.

No problem with that, if the clubs can bring in wealthy backers/sponsors or increase gates, good on them. but it doesn't seem right just to give them a leg up. 

Finally, much as we supporters of lesser clubs might find it difficult to digest, the "product" of SL is what attracts the broadcasters and most of the sponsors. Those clubs quite rightly receive the lions share of the money generated and deserve to have the loudest voices.

No problem with them taking a bigger proportion, but, I don't agree with the loudest voice part. Could you imagine if they did the same thing in politics regarding voting? There would be an absolute riot. Currently in the RFL our system would be like saying, if I had 3 shillings and 6 pence more than you in the bank, or I lived in the home counties and you lived up North, my vote would count twice as much as yours does. How can that be right?

 

[Blind side johnny]

1 hour ago, DOGFATHER said:

 

Hence the use of "my understanding is". There was an interview with a SL chairman recently, can't remember which (Hudgell maybe) where he said that they had agreed with this, but the truth will emerge eventually we hope.

Maybe "the loudest voice" was an inappropriate choice of words. How's about "the interests of SL must also be in the best interest of RL as a whole"?

[Robthegasman]

As a Swinton Lions fan I agree with the Rams and Doggies fans here who have criticised the timing of this,it is frankly appalling and this should have been decided at the beginning of the season but that is the Rugby League for you,they are worse at getting things done and they make Theresa May and her Government look like professionals of a high order strangely.

Anyway back to the proposals yes I think a 14 team league in the Championship is logical and sensible with no 8s and league game wise there will be 2 games less and is I think a simple format and in my opinion the simpler things are the better understood they are.

And yes I think that given the screw up that happened with Bradford when they should have restarted life as a new club in Championship 1 promoting the top 2 from Championship 1 and reprieving both Rochdale and us would be a fair way this season as this has only just been considered and put on the table so in effect the season this year you could argue through no fault of any club has been a dead duck so why punish us and Hornets on this one occasion even if admittedly on the field we have both been poor?

[DOGFATHER]

8 hours ago, Robthegasman said:

As a Swinton Lions fan I agree with the Rams and Doggies fans here who have criticised the timing of this,it is frankly appalling and this should have been decided at the beginning of the season but that is the Rugby League for you,they are worse at getting things done and they make Theresa May and her Government look like professionals of a high order strangely.

Anyway back to the proposals yes I think a 14 team league in the Championship is logical and sensible with no 8s and league game wise there will be 2 games less and is I think a simple format and in my opinion the simpler things are the better understood they are.

And yes I think that given the screw up that happened with Bradford when they should have restarted life as a new club in Championship 1 promoting the top 2 from Championship 1 and reprieving both Rochdale and us would be a fair way this season as this has only just been considered and put on the table so in effect the season this year you could argue through no fault of any club has been a dead duck so why punish us and Hornets on this one occasion even if admittedly on the field we have both been poor?

Best of luck Rob, I hope it all works out for you.

[Robthegasman]

7 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

Best of luck Rob, I hope it all work out for you.

Cheers for that. We have got our fingers crossed and ideally I hope us and Hornets are given a reprieve with this potential restructuring and on the Lions front only I hope that whatever is decided it gives us a huge boost and injection of vitamins on the field of play and I hope we can rally and get a few wins in the remaining 4 games especially against both Barrow and Batley(sorry Dogfather)and for the icing on the cake shock wins against Featherstone and Leigh who with their off field issues along with frankly having nothing to play for as they are both going to be in the divisional Grand Final anyway could be there for the taking,Fingers

And if we are going to be in the Championship next season thanks to restructuring then with the now good management off the field and improvement on that side we can do what both Dewsbury and Batley have done and firmly establish ourselves in this division.

[doggystyle]

Never know who can scratch who's back in the last game, if it comes to that. I think the whole thing stinks and is focussed around the Bulls or whatever brand they are these days. 

[Blind side johnny]

15 hours ago, doggystyle said:

Never know who can scratch who's back in the last game, if it comes to that. I think the whole thing stinks and is focussed around the Bulls or whatever brand they are these days. 

Quite the opposite if you take the time to study the proposals properly.

[coolie]

Featherstone only want to get rid of the Blackpool bash because

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It saves them giving Halifax 2 points

Which stopped them making the top 4

[9' oller]

Careful you know fax and fev don't play nicely. Their delusions of grandeur are lethal

[Batley Bob]

[BatleyBird]

Is it me being thick or is that hard to follow? Why does everything have to be so complicated.?

What’s wrong with 1st v 4th, 2nd v 3rd, then winners in a final?

[Dogstew]

1 hour ago, BatleyBird said:

Is it me being thick or is that hard to follow? Why does everything have to be so complicated.?

What’s wrong with 1st v 4th, 2nd v 3rd, then winners in a final?

Stringing it out to four rounds?

Is this for promotion? If so it’s great for any team with their eyes on a top 5 spot then a short knockout run. 

Or is it just another meaningless end of season fiasco?