The Nine who Voted with SL

[Padge]

What I don't get is why in a document that was published in December 2017 have a list of members that is so out of date as to be useless.

I went to the document to clear up the list of members question and finished up with something that just comes up with more inconsistencies

[getdownmonkeyman]

So much for a secret ballot.

[paulwalker71]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Harlequins Rugby Football Club Limited?

With the absence of London Bronco's on that list Harlequins must be pertaining to them, they have not had the name Harlequins since 2011, could it be that as you say the list is hugely out of date, even though Padge states it is from December 2017, or who actually is the holding company for London Bronco's?

No Coventry

No Hemel

No West Wales

[Padge]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

who actually is the holding company for London Bronco's?

London Rugby League Limited, formerly Harlequins Rugby League Ltd.

[del capo]

2 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

You seem to have misunderstood what i was suggesting. Im not suggesting disenfranchising the whole game and you have for some reason set some strange, pointless all or nothing false dichotomy.

How much funding the championship and L1 get, the process for P+R between SL and the Championship etc are not matters for the Armed Forces RL. It doesnt affect them. Giving them a say on that matter, and matters where they are largely unaffected, or matters where their vote would be based on a more philosophical or principled view is poor governance.

Armed forces RL, Barla, the community game et al are in the game and have a place at the council for one reason and one reason only, to be the voice of their constituents. Where there constituents are not directly affected they dont need a voice, it is in fact poor governane to give them a voice. It creates conflicts of interests and raises the prospect of vote trading if not outright vote buying. That goes for everyone in the game.

A comparative issue would "The West Lothian Question" Where scottish (and Irish, and Welsh) MP's were able to vote in parliament on issues only affecting England. Clearly an unacceptable situation.

Think of it another way, forget that the split this time was largely along the lines of SL v the lower leagues. Imagine the split was simply 50/50. Half of SL and half of the lower leagues on one side, half on the other. A resolution regarding the funding of the Championship and L1 and P+R between SL and the lower leagues would pass or fail solely on the votes of areas of the game which were completely unaffected by it.

You say that there were matters that did affect those areas of the game, and where there is they should get a vote (though why they get 7, and why specifically armed forces RL im not sure) but giving them votes on the parts that do affect them doesnt necessitate giving them votes on the parts that dont.

But it wasn't a 'West Lothian ' question.  And not a single issue proposal either.

If the result had gone against SLE then they would have walked , probably immediately and certainly by 2021 and ALL the TV money with them , resulting in the likely collapse of the RFL  ,the downstream funding to the lower leagues and the support services to the community game.

So yes those community votes were exercised on behalf of their members and mattered. It's realpolitik Scotchy. Not voting for christmas as another poster mentions, but shoring up the old lady in the hope of better times. Hopefully the powers that be will note  the stance the community game took when the chips were down....

 

[del capo]

14 minutes ago, getdownmonkeyman said:

So much for a secret ballot.

 I believe  (I was not present) that the ballot papers were colour coded , not individualized  and the teller was a retired referee. That doesn't stop the various groupings sharing their views both before and afterwards !

[Padge]

24 minutes ago, del capo said:

 I believe  (I was not present) that the ballot papers were colour coded , not individualized  and the teller was a retired referee. That doesn't stop the various groupings sharing their views both before and afterwards !

The vote weighting for Council meetings has to colour code for each section because for a motion to be passed there must be as follows:-

a resolution of the Council passed at a duly convened meeting of the Council by simple majority on a show of hands or, on a poll, more than 50% of the votes given in relation to that resolution which must in either case include the affirmative votes of not less than four Championship or League 1 Members and not less than four SLE Members; 
 

[marklaspalmas]

30 minutes ago, del capo said:

But it wasn't a 'West Lothian ' question.  And not a single issue proposal either.

If the result had gone against SLE then they would have walked , probably immediately and certainly by 2021 and ALL the TV money with them , resulting in the likely collapse of the RFL  ,the downstream funding to the lower leagues and the support services to the community game.

So yes those community votes were exercised on behalf of their members and mattered. It's realpolitik Scotchy. Not voting for christmas as another poster mentions, but shoring up the old lady in the hope of better times. Hopefully the powers that be will note  the stance the community game took when the chips were down....

 

I understood and completely disagreed with your previous points about those 7 areas being members of the RL Council and legitimate voices on this issue.

Now you appear to be suggesting that it was all ok because they were just wheeled out to prevent a breakaway by SL therefore job done?

I don't agree with Scotchy much at all, but he's right here.

[del capo]

3 minutes ago, marklaspalmas said:

I understood and completely disagreed with your previous points about those 7 areas being members of the RL Council and legitimate voices on this issue.

Now you appear to be suggesting that it was all ok because they were just wheeled out to prevent a breakaway by SL therefore job done?

I don't agree with Scotchy much at all, but he's right here.

 Nobody wheeled out, though it might suit your agenda to say so.

No pressure placed on anyone ,certainly not at the Community Board meeting the day before.

Check out the delegates  empowered to vote I mentioned on the Community forum. Persons of integrity, vast knowledge  of the game and no axe to grind. They just used their judgement in voting when the Rules say they were entitled to. Live with it.

[marklaspalmas]

3 minutes ago, del capo said:

 Nobody wheeled out, though it might suit your agenda to say so.

No pressure placed on anyone ,certainly not at the Community Board meeting the day before.

Check out the delegates  empowered to vote I mentioned on the Community forum. Persons of integrity, vast knowledge  of the game and no axe to grind. They just used their judgement in voting when the Rules say they were entitled to. Live with it.

No agenda. No axes. Read my contributions. I really don't care too much. It made no difference anyway why why would I care?

No mention of pressure applied, apart from yourself.

They voted because they could. Given. The point, which you're sidestepping, is should they have a vote on this issue? I think not.

[del capo]

4 minutes ago, marklaspalmas said:

No agenda. No axes. Read my contributions. I really don't care too much. It made no difference anyway why why would I care?

No mention of pressure applied, apart from yourself.

They voted because they could. Given. The point, which you're sidestepping, is should they have a vote on this issue? I think not.

The proposal ran to 4 pages and the decision would have impacted directly on ALL aspects of the game , not just who is in Super League next year and how/if you get promoted. It was never a line by line , item by item process...to be voted on like that but instead a take it or leave it scenario. Would love to see that document posted here by anyone to whom it was directly sent! The game still falls far short on issues of transparency......

So yes all Council members needed to have their say.

And for what it's worth I agree the West Lothian point when properly applied.

Still take issue though about your 'wheeling out' comment....

[marklaspalmas]

1 minute ago, del capo said:

The proposal ran to 4 pages and the decision would have impacted directly on ALL aspects of the game , not just who is in Super League next year and how/if you get promoted. It was never a line by line , item by item process...to be voted on like that but instead a take it or leave it scenario. Would love to see that document posted here by anyone to whom it was directly sent! The game still falls far short on issues of transparency......

So yes all Council members needed to have their say.

And for what it's worth I agree the West Lothian point when properly applied.

Still take issue though about your 'wheeling out' comment....

Well, if we ever hear about all the other issues voted on  and not just the pro league restructures, I'd be happy to go with that, especially as you now acknowledge parallels with the WLQ.

The wheeling out comment was slightly unnessary but this quote

Quote

 

If the result had gone against SLE then they would have walked , probably immediately and certainly by 2021 and ALL the TV money with them , resulting in the likely collapse of the RFL  ,the downstream funding to the lower leagues and the support services to the community game. So yes those community votes were exercised on behalf of their members and mattered.

 

really did make it sound that you think the 7 were used to prevent a SL breakaway. I think they may well have been. This reflects far worse on SL clubs than those 7.

[del capo]

1 hour ago, marklaspalmas said:

Well, if we ever hear about all the other issues voted on  and not just the pro league restructures, I'd be happy to go with that, especially as you now acknowledge parallels with the WLQ.

The wheeling out comment was slightly unnessary but this quote

really did make it sound that you think the 7 were used to prevent a SL breakaway. I think they may well have been. This reflects far worse on SL clubs than those 7.

 I agree.  SLE muscle was flexed ( not directly ) and the Community voters took a step back and then  took a view. The nuclear option was avoided for the present. Credit I think where credit is due....