Leigh's unethical behaviour towards players

[LeytherRob]

3 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

My man, ask BraFord.

The fact you keep dangling these patronising 'my man's and 'buddy's just shows how much you're clutching at straws now. Do tell me again how liquidating a club doesn't fall under 'offload or bust' again.

[DoubleD]

2 hours ago, Private Baldrick said:

The answer he fails to give is NONE! Speaking as a Fev fan, we faced similar difficulties to Leigh in the Shield competition mainly through a large injury crisis. We weren't allowed to utilise the DR system because of the rules and with having no reserves (unlike this season) we struggled for numbers, resulting in naming less than a 17 man match day squad on a few occasions. We fulfilled all our fixtures, as did Leigh.

That's hardly something to be proud of. The RFL had to bend their operational rules to allow for the fulfillment of the fixture. Championship fans can hardly complain about the lack of coverage and TV deals when you have owners threatening to rip up contracts, not fulfil fixtures and generally bringing the game into disrepute. I can just imagine what potential sponsors would think.............whilst your club have been on the life support machine being delivered by Leeds.

[Padge]

9 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Agreements were reached after he threatened administration and couldnt fulfil his fixtures

No doubt if that happened to you, and you went home to the wife and you were struggling to pay the mortgage you would say

"hey, love, dont be upset, theres no need to be angry! The RFL gave them special dispensation to loan an SL academy player to replace me, they are going to fulfil their fixtures and not break any operational rules now the RFL have given that leeway"

and she will look wistfully in your eyes, tears streaming down her face, full of hope and trust. A look only a wife can give a husband and she says "I know you've worked your whole life for this my love, I'm so proud of you and if I need to take on extra hours at work and we we need to cut back on some.luxuries we can make it. I'll get my hair done less and I've got some clothes to sell, we can make it together. But do...do you think...maybe...possibly... if we are lucky...degsy will fund a tilt at promotion next year?"

And off you go again, the fixtures were completed, they did not fail to fulfil a single fixture. Administration was going to be the only option when the clubs money has run out if something isn't done to cut costs, its a dilemma businesses face every day.

I am no fan of Bo Derek and predicted years ago it would all end in tears, but you are way off the mark, when confronted with reality Bo did what he had to do to ensure the club survived, the other option was to risk going bust and everybody loses.

[LeytherRob]

6 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

The one you argued he did but it was ok cos nobody sued him

The one I argue never happened.

You, know the redundancy process that saw no roles made redunant

Where did I mention anything about redundancy? First mention of it was you replying to sweaty Craiq.

[LeytherRob]

11 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Agreements were reached after he threatened administration and couldnt fulfil his fixtures

No doubt if that happened to you, and you went home to the wife and you were struggling to pay the mortgage you would say

"hey, love, dont be upset, theres no need to be angry! The RFL gave them special dispensation to loan an SL academy player to replace me, they are going to fulfil their fixtures and not break any operational rules now the RFL have given that leeway"

and she will look wistfully in your eyes, tears streaming down her face, full of hope and trust. A look only a wife can give a husband and she says "I know you've worked your whole life for this my love, I'm so proud of you and if I need to take on extra hours at work and we we need to cut back on some.luxuries we can make it. I'll get my hair done less and I've got some clothes to sell, we can make it together. But do...do you think...maybe...possibly... if we are lucky...degsy will fund a tilt at promotion next year?"

Except the issues surrounding he 2 players in question happened after the season finished. You even quoted an article saying they were the 2 remaining contracted players at the club. You're just delving deeper into the realms of your own fantasy here. One of those players subsequently signed for Bradford, the other for Swinton and has subsequently retired before coming to a recent Leigh match as Derek's guest so he could say goodbye the fans.

[LeytherRob]

2 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Do Bradford continue to exist? Was a Bradford liquidated? How about Widnes?

If we set up a new Leigh and that Leigh continued to exist and that Leigh paid of the debts of degsys midnight runners would.anyone care that a decking salesman lost some money because he refused to pay his players?

No, Bradford went bust and a new club was set up. That's literally Padge was describing when he said 'offload or bust'.

[Padge]

Just now, scotchy1 said:

I'm not confusing anything buddy if they arent one and the same, explain to me how widnes for instance could get a deduction for going in to administration when they have new owners?

Or how Bradford could get a deduction and a loss of funding despite a brand new company taking their place and the old company being liquidated?

Perhaps, and I'm just spiralling here, the holding company are the member of the RFL and as such treated as one and the same?

I mean the RFL hold a list of their members someone could check?

Cut the buddy, I am not your buddy and find your use of it quite obnoxious and an attempt at intimidation. 

Widnes broke the operational rules, it is quite simple. Change of ownership is not in the operational rules as a mitigation for avoiding a points reduction , administration is in the rules as a reason for a points deduction. That may be wrong in your eyes but those are the rules.

Leigh did not go into administration because they decided to take action to avoid it. Therefore Leigh were not in breach.

Go away and read the operational rules, not the greatest of reads but they are very enlightening. 

 

[LeytherRob]

1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

Nope.what he said was that the.options were, offload the contracts.and stay afloat or or go bust and not fulfill the contracta

Those arent the two options there is one to let the business go.bust, keep.the.club going and fulfil.the contracts

Oh Scotchy, you really have had a right mare tonight. You've managed to be so wrong you managed to unite Wigan and Leigh fans in the same argument. You deserve kudos for that at least.

[Padge]

8 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

I'm sorry, but that is the funniest thing I have ever seen on here.

 

7 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Nope.what he said was that the.options were, offload the contracts.and stay afloat or or go bust and not fulfill the contracta

Those arent the two options there is one to let the business go.bust, keep.the.club going and fulfil.the contracts

If the club has no money how do you keep the club going and fulfil the contracts you have no money to pay.

That is a bizarre position to take, BUDDY.

[phiggins]

26 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Nope.what he said was that the.options were, offload the contracts.and stay afloat or or go bust and not fulfill the contracta

Those arent the two options there is one to let the business go.bust, keep.the.club going and fulfil.the contracts

So, in order to avoid contracts being ripped up because the company has gone bust, the company should go bust...

[Private Baldrick]

9 hours ago, DoubleD said:

That's hardly something to be proud of. The RFL had to bend their operational rules to allow for the fulfillment of the fixture. Championship fans can hardly complain about the lack of coverage and TV deals when you have owners threatening to rip up contracts, not fulfil fixtures and generally bringing the game into disrepute. I can just imagine what potential sponsors would think.............whilst your club have been on the life support machine being delivered by Leeds.

Who said I was proud? Believe me, I am no fan of DR and wish it was abandoned by all clubs. Our (Fev's) 'owner' had not threatened to rip up any contracts, that was Leigh. We (Fev) fulfilled all our fixtures and had a team for the final, maybe not a full 17, but a team to fulfil the fixture. Our club has not been on 'life support being delivered by Leeds' as you put it. We have a partnership with Leeds that under the current rules is available to all Championship clubs should they choose to go down that path. 

[phiggins]

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

No. The RFL pay the contracts through a new company out of future funding. The old company goes bust and nobody cares except the decking salesman that refused to pay his bills

The new company that doesn’t exist? Who owns this company?

You can argue for stronger sanctions for clubs that miss payments to players, that goes beyond the special measures that the RFL put the club into. But you’re going beyond parody now, saying the club should’ve gone bust and that a company that doesn’t even exist yet would pick up the tab of a liquidated company.

And back to my original point, you have no idea what the club did to get out of special measures, and what settlements were reached with the players. You seem to want a points deduction because you don’t like what the owner said in an interview.

[phiggins]

3 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

All this had already been explained fella. And it wouldnt be the first time central funding was held back from a newco.

 And I wouldn't deduct points from them for liquidating Leigh sporting ltd. A sporting sanction for a business decision is silly.

 I'd deduct point for not being able to field a side, that's a pretty serious sporting offence

Fella, you're suggesting withholding funding from a company that might never even exist. That is idiotic.

A points deduction for not fielding a side is fair enough imo. Generally in other sports it would equate to the number of points on offer, or being removed from a cup competition.

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

Fev and Leigh weren't the only clubs club to not name 17 players on match day last season, and on at least one occasion another Championship club named 17 players but only actually had 16 present at the game. Bizarely I don't remember much wailing and gnashing of teeth about those. Let's be honest, if there was a threat of a sanction 17 players would be named, whether they were just going to keep the bench warm or not.

Fev lost 5 players to season ending injuries after the end of season registration deadline and others picked up suspensions. Exactly what rule is going to be put in place to mitigate against that?