Jump to content
Total Rugby League

Nine thing we want to see in 2020 from Championship and League 1

Recommended Posts

Here are my New Year wishes. 1 No off-field drama at Bradford There are still plenty of unanswered questions that many, although seemingly not enough,...

View the full article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First and foremost I hope my team Swinton Lions once again consolidate their position in the Championship and 9th would be very nice if possible, and to see them in a strong position off the field with no worries.

But I also want to see the future of the game for clubs outside Super League talked about at the highest volume level of decibels because we are very close to the end of the 2021 season(it will go quickly)when the current TV deal ends,and I want to see what the plans are by the governing body on this,and see how the clubs themselves are going to face this and how they plan on dealing with it.I want full frankness warts an all and in the open no matter how good or bad the news is by all.Otherwise we could be looking at a very bitter dispute and civil war like happened in darts over 20 years ago.We want action,because from where I am sat I see sweet all happening.And given what is at stake it is an absolute disgrace that people have their heads in the sand hoping it will go away and sort itself out.

Well it damned well won’t.And it is time all people within the sport wake the up and smell the coffee.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think my main hope, as a fan of a L1 team, is that the powers that be decide what the purpose of L1 is. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/12/2019 at 10:00, Robthegasman said:

First and foremost I hope my team Swinton Lions once again consolidate their position in the Championship and 9th would be very nice if possible, and to see them in a strong position off the field with no worries.

But I also want to see the future of the game for clubs outside Super League talked about at the highest volume level of decibels because we are very close to the end of the 2021 season(it will go quickly)when the current TV deal ends,and I want to see what the plans are by the governing body on this,and see how the clubs themselves are going to face this and how they plan on dealing with it.I want full frankness warts an all and in the open no matter how good or bad the news is by all.Otherwise we could be looking at a very bitter dispute and civil war like happened in darts over 20 years ago.We want action,because from where I am sat I see sweet all happening.And given what is at stake it is an absolute disgrace that people have their heads in the sand hoping it will go away and sort itself out.

Well it damned well won’t.And it is time all people within the sport wake the up and smell the coffee.

 

I don't quite understand this. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't all this get worked through last year? It was a bit dicey at times but ultimately, and not least because of a surprising degree of unity among the Ch clubs, a deal was agreed that kept the SL clubs in the RFL, restored P&R and fixed a formula for how the next broadcasting contract would be shared. It's all done and dusted. Just up to the clubs to do their bit now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Future is League said:

Perhaps it can used to develop more non heartland clubs.

It's original purpose , but that also didn't work 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The Future is League said:

Perhaps it can used to develop more non heartland clubs.

Such aspirations for the sport have been talked about every since Fulham came into being in 1980 ... and just how far has it gone since then ?

Every new club in a non-traditional area has been seen as "the dawn of a new age" yet where are Kent Invicta, Nottingham, Oxford,  Carlisle, Cardiff, Scarborough ?

The formation of Fulham/London brought the number of UK-based professional teams to 31 and yet in the 40 years since then that number has only risen to the current 34. And of the new clubs formed since 1980, none of them are currently in Super League and only one (Sheffield) in the Championship.

Yes I know that, in a remake of the traditional Christmas song, "Bad tidings I bring to you and your King" but as much as I along with every RL supporter in the country would love to see it as a genuine national and even global sport, the reality is that it appears that those outside the traditional heartlands (apart, of course, from a few relative minority of enthusiasts) do not consider it as a major interest of theirs. If they did then I suspect they would have shown that interest long before now.

I therefore ask has the effort and finances which have already been spent on trying to establish the game in such non-traditional RL areas of the UK been worthwhile ?  If not, what makes people believe that would change in the future ?

Yes, a negative view ... but is it not right to consider such aspects just as much as the views of those who believe Rugby League has a bright future ahead of it ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, RL does what Sky says said:

as much as I along with every RL supporter in the country would love to see it as a genuine national and even global sport, the reality is that it appears that those outside the traditional heartlands (apart, of course, from a few relative minority of enthusiasts) do not consider it as a major interest of theirs. If they did then I suspect they would have shown that interest long before now.

I genuinely believe this to be a misnomer. All of the examples you cite, along with every single instance of attempted 'expansion' that I can think of in the UK, the common denominator is underfunding. When we try to expand over here, we try and do it on a shoestring - e.g. London receiving the same central funding and salary cap despite a living cost of approx 3x that of towns in RL heartlands, and Gateshead receiving less than the full amount of central funding in their debut SL season. In Australia, Melbourne are still heavily subsidised to my knowledge.

The wider public is generally only interested in top class sport - not 2nd or 3rd rate sport (let's not bring soccer in to the equation, because that is a global behemoth and the exception to the rule). Toronto have captured people's imagination because they have been successful and spent a shed load of cash (and it remains to be seen how successful they will be long term). Expecting supporters in places such as London or Coventry to flock in droves to watch underfunded teams struggling at a lower level is naive in the extreme. If a successful Coventry Bears were playing in Super League out of the Ricoh Arena with the likes of Sonny Bill Williams and other stars playing for them, then I would expect their crowds to compare very favourably with the likes of Wakefield, Huddersfield and Salford in the traditional 'heartlands' (an underfunded Gateshead averaged nearly 4k in their solitary season in Super League). Unfortunately, there isn't a multi-millionaire looking to throw loads of money at it to make it happen. Moreover, the wider game currently does not have the money to try and expand properly in to these new areas. 

For me, it's a case of doing it properly or not bothering. If the money isn't there to do it properly, then it's a waste even trying. How much money was wasted on Oxford, Hemel and Gloucestershire with nothing to now show for it? This money could surely have been spent more wisely, even if it was a case of just targeting one of those areas and giving it more of a chance.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, RL does what Sky says said:

Such aspirations for the sport have been talked about every since Fulham came into being in 1980 ... and just how far has it gone since then ?

Every new club in a non-traditional area has been seen as "the dawn of a new age" yet where are Kent Invicta, Nottingham, Oxford,  Carlisle, Cardiff, Scarborough ?

The formation of Fulham/London brought the number of UK-based professional teams to 31 and yet in the 40 years since then that number has only risen to the current 34. And of the new clubs formed since 1980, none of them are currently in Super League and only one (Sheffield) in the Championship.

Yes I know that, in a remake of the traditional Christmas song, "Bad tidings I bring to you and your King" but as much as I along with every RL supporter in the country would love to see it as a genuine national and even global sport, the reality is that it appears that those outside the traditional heartlands (apart, of course, from a few relative minority of enthusiasts) do not consider it as a major interest of theirs. If they did then I suspect they would have shown that interest long before now.

I therefore ask has the effort and finances which have already been spent on trying to establish the game in such non-traditional RL areas of the UK been worthwhile ?  If not, what makes people believe that would change in the future ?

Yes, a negative view ... but is it not right to consider such aspects just as much as the views of those who believe Rugby League has a bright future ahead of it ?

In an odd way L1 has been used to develop non heartland clubs recently - they just happened to have been based in the south of France  and Canada rather than southern England. My point is in addition to this, the league has also been used to - essentially help save Bradford, as a jumping off point for growing northern clubs (York and Newcastle), for English expansion clubs of which only Skolars and Coventry remain (not sure how I'd classify the Welsh clubs) and finally as a life line for heartland clubs who have been around for a long time but struggle. It's a hotch potch. These competing aims are not compatible. It probably made little sense putting the new  southern clubs like Oxford with a lack of players straight into L1 and them competing with established northern  teams. What All Golds are currently doing at an amateur level makes much more sense.

Going back to the original question - I would like the status of L1 clarified and established and it seen as part of a pyramid where there is a reasonable chance of clubs having a go at promotion. This would then force a rethink about how to create an even playing field for clubs like mine who struggle to find players and what to do with new  entrants who, like Toronto and Toulouse cut their way through the league with their full time players. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Expecting supporters in places such as London or Coventry to flock in droves to watch underfunded teams struggling at a lower level is naive in the extreme.

 

Totally agree with this (and the rest of your post).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While agreeing with the comments concerning a lack of funding of so-called "expansion" clubs; where have all those people with money been in the 40 years since Fulham's formation in 1980 in order to expand the game in a better way ?

Such people don't seem to have come forward in that time ... so why think they will in the future ?

Edited by RL does what Sky says

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, RL does what Sky says said:

Such people don't seem to have come forward in that time ... so why think they will in the future ?

I'm not convinced that they will either. However, the current system is likely to deter any potential investors. The salary cap, and lack of any special dispensation for London, means that any investor is unable to buy success and is essentially having to compete with one hand behind their back. Plus, the levelling of the comp via the salary cap means that there is a fair chance of relegation. I've long argued that if the game is serious about developing London, then they should have a salary cap 3x larger than the northern teams to cover the cost of living, and that they should also have a higher proportion of central funding in order to provide a level playing field. Under the present system, any London team is handicapped before a ball is kicked, and is therefore doomed to fail. I don't see this as being an attractive proposition for any investor.

For me, the game needs to work out how to maximise the use of what money is available to best develop the sport rather than frittering it away. The relatively recent League 1 expansion smacked of hedging their bets, by chucking a little bit of money at several clubs and hoping that one or more succeed, as opposed to having a clear strategy and focusing their resources on the best option.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I genuinely believe this to be a misnomer. All of the examples you cite, along with every single instance of attempted 'expansion' that I can think of in the UK, the common denominator is underfunding. When we try to expand over here, we try and do it on a shoestring - e.g. London receiving the same central funding and salary cap despite a living cost of approx 3x that of towns in RL heartlands, and Gateshead receiving less than the full amount of central funding in their debut SL season. In Australia, Melbourne are still heavily subsidised to my knowledge.

 

Good post but to clarify the London situation I quote from the Super League salary cap regulations
Salary Cap Regulations 2016

Quote

 

5.12 London Allowance

In recognition of the higher living costs for London Broncos players due to their location a 10% London cost of living weighting allowance is applied to the Club’s maximum Aggregate Liability is available in addition to the Club Trained dispensation, subject to the combined value of both allowances being capped at the 10% weighting allowance.

 

Of course the problerm is , as you identify, the lack of funding. If you have a transplanted sport then you are actually limited in the number of rich investors interested in the sport . Withn London Broncos in the super league era you had Brisbane Broncos taking over the club, then the self-publicist Branson who offloaded the club sharpish, then the native Swintonian David Hughes folowed by native Wiganer and Wigan RLFC fan Ian Lenagan, who understandably left when the opportunity to own his home town club arose, before David Hughes retuned.

Kiwi Eric Watson may or may not have wanted to buy into the club depending upon which version of history you believe but despite The Guardian's Gavin Willacy and another individual with an agenda who haunts messageboards assertion that there are investors waiting in the wings this has never materialised. Nor to my knowledge is there anyone.

Another little problem is this, when transplated northerners come down they come down as fans of their home town club therfore it is difficult to switch allegances to the Southern RL Clubs. It's not the same dynamic as someone from the south who followed say Castleford because they were on TV, If you have no connection with the club or area it's much easier to switch.to the local team.

Now much as I bag the Skolars on this board. The real reason I only see them on about 2-3 occasions in a season boils down to the fact that I am a London Broncos fan first and foremost and for me it's the same  as a transplanted Northerner. Yes, I have a crowded sporting diary, particularily in the cricket season, and yes, they do play in a lower league. Those are considerations but not the main reason. My point which you have alluded to is even amongst the very disparate Rugby League community in the South East Peoople already have a team so the only way to expand is through getting new fans for the sport which centres on getting the oxygen of publicity through being on national TV in the top tier, even if it is Pay per View TV, and to get your club club in that position it requires money as you point out.

You can have as high a salary cap as you like but unless there is an individual or group willing to fund up to that cap limit then you have the situation as it is today.

 

 

Edited by THE RED ROOSTER
  • Like 1

?

Quote

The dominant ideas in society are always and everywhere the ideas of the ruling class. And always and everywhere they portray us as stupid, untrustworthy with bad motives. Show us respect sir. We gave you everything progressive there is. We gave you democracy. We demand some too.

 
Eddie Demsey RMT
 
Quote

There were 17.4m people who voted to leave the European Union.

"Any attempt to try to cast their vote aside, as if they didn’t mean it or didn’t understand the consequences, whereas everybody else did, is a bit of a slur on the individuals who took the time to vote, many of them for the first time

Ian Lavery - Labour party chair  - 29th March 2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

Good post but to clarify the London situation I quote from the Super League salary cap regulations
Salary Cap Regulations 2016

Quote

 

5.12 London Allowance

In recognition of the higher living costs for London Broncos players due to their location a 10% London cost of living weighting allowance is applied to the Club’s maximum Aggregate Liability is available in addition to the Club Trained dispensation, subject to the combined value of both allowances being capped at the 10% weighting allowance.

Given that the cost of rent is apparently approx 150% higher in London compared to Leeds, a 10% weighting barely scratches the surface. You won't need me to tell you that a player's salary is going to go a lot further up north compared to London.

3 hours ago, THE RED ROOSTER said:

You can have as high a salary cap as you like but unless there is an individual or group willing to fund up to that cap limit then you have the situation as it is today.

Yes this is the big issue. But it's a bit of a chicken and egg situation, in that unless there is a higher salary cap for the London team, I'm not sure why any investors would step forward to chuck their money down the drain given that it's going to be nigh-on impossible for them to construct a winning side given the restrictions placed upon them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Given that the cost of rent is apparently approx 150% higher in London compared to Leeds, a 10% weighting barely scratches the surface. You won't need me to tell you that a player's salary is going to go a lot further up north compared to London.

Yes this is the big issue. But it's a bit of a chicken and egg situation, in that unless there is a higher salary cap for the London team, I'm not sure why any investors would step forward to chuck their money down the drain given that it's going to be nigh-on impossible for them to construct a winning side given the restrictions placed upon them

So you are assuming it is a salary cap issue ? , Nah if say David Argyle turned up at a SLE/RFL meeting and said " I'm willing to chuck 5 mill a year at LB , but I want dispensation " , you are telling me they'd vote that down ? 

No way 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So you are assuming it is a salary cap issue ? , Nah if say David Argyle turned up at a SLE/RFL meeting and said " I'm willing to chuck 5 mill a year at LB , but I want dispensation " , you are telling me they'd vote that down ? 

My gut feeling is that the majority wouldn't want to give any dispensation. I may be wide of the mark with that, but unfortunately I think too many of the SL clubs make decisions based on their own interests rather than the wider interests of the competition and the game. More to the point, I'm not sure that 5 million a year would be enough to guarantee London success - my guess is that it would cost a fair bit more than that!

It remains to be seen what will happen with Toronto and Argyle in the longer term. I can't see him being too keen on flirting with relegation, so the question may be whether there ends up being pressure to ring-fence the SL again, or whether a breakaway competition ends up being formed. It's probably all tied in with the private equity scenario as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

My gut feeling is that the majority wouldn't want to give any dispensation. I may be wide of the mark with that, but unfortunately I think too many of the SL clubs make decisions based on their own interests rather than the wider interests of the competition and the game.

Agreed. That is why I have fears for the future of the game itself. If the Super League clubs continue to forge ahead and leave the rest behind then I believe the base of the RL pyramid (ie the local clubs and communities who have had the support of those with an interest in RL for decades gone by) will crumble away and take with them the players and supporters who would otherwise have been the future lifeblood of the game - and then where will the Super League clubs get their next batch of rising stars from ?

I believe RL will never become the national game that many want it to be (and I myself really do wish it was) but maybe it might be time to decide if we want to keep trying to force other parts of the country to accept it as such or should we concentrate on providing the game to those areas where the people really want and appreciate it ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, RL does what Sky says said:

maybe it might be time to decide if we want to keep trying to force other parts of the country to accept it as such or should we concentrate on providing the game to those areas where the people really want and appreciate it ?

Dunno if you heard the brilliant edition of the BBC RL podcast earlier this year with Shane Richardson (South Sydney and ex-Gateshead) and Mark Evans (ex Melbourne and Harlequins). They made very pragmatic arguments about focusing on areas where RL is already strong and has a track record for well-supported clubs (such as Bradford). Their view was that trying to expand to new areas is going to cost millions, and therefore the game needs to focus its limited resources where it will see the biggest return. 

This kind of links to the point i was making earlier, whereby either we do expansion properly and fund/resource it accordingly, or lets not bother. IMO, there isn't anything in the water in the heartlands that makes people like rugby league more than elsewhere in the country - it's just that they are more likely to have a high profile team on their doorstep that engages them. For me, rugby league is a fantastic sport, and has the potential to engage new fans anywhere. But only if it is a top class team with star players playing winning/competitive rugby in a nice stadium. I honestly believe that a top class team in any decent sized city in the country would be able to draw half decent crowds very easily (certainly comparable with Wakey, Hudds, Salford etc). The problem is that it will cost somebody millions and millions of pounds to achieve it. Unfortunately, the game doesn't have that sort of money to spend, so realistically we probably need to focus on areas that will give us the most bang for our buck, such as Bradford, York etc. But then this level of pragmatism also leads back to the dreaded P&R vs licencing argument, and whether the game can afford the risk of not having the biggest supported clubs in the top division.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Dunno if you heard the brilliant edition of the BBC RL podcast earlier this year with Shane Richardson (South Sydney and ex-Gateshead) and Mark Evans (ex Melbourne and Harlequins). They made very pragmatic arguments about focusing on areas where RL is already strong and has a track record for well-supported clubs (such as Bradford). Their view was that trying to expand to new areas is going to cost millions, and therefore the game needs to focus its limited resources where it will see the biggest return. 

This kind of links to the point i was making earlier, whereby either we do expansion properly and fund/resource it accordingly, or lets not bother. IMO, there isn't anything in the water in the heartlands that makes people like rugby league more than elsewhere in the country - it's just that they are more likely to have a high profile team on their doorstep that engages them. For me, rugby league is a fantastic sport, and has the potential to engage new fans anywhere. But only if it is a top class team with star players playing winning/competitive rugby in a nice stadium. I honestly believe that a top class team in any decent sized city in the country would be able to draw half decent crowds very easily (certainly comparable with Wakey, Hudds, Salford etc). The problem is that it will cost somebody millions and millions of pounds to achieve it. Unfortunately, the game doesn't have that sort of money to spend, so realistically we probably need to focus on areas that will give us the most bang for our buck, such as Bradford, York etc. But then this level of pragmatism also leads back to the dreaded P&R vs licencing argument, and whether the game can afford the risk of not having the biggest supported clubs in the top division.

Totally agree. If such people with that kind of money were to invest in RL then I am certain they would have done it before now. The problem is that those in the game at the moment are too interested in just bringing success to their own club - and profits as well as glory for themselves. OK, I can understand their reason as they are businessmen and thus the overall interest of the sport does come second (at most) in their list of priorities.

However, while they continue to boost their own egos and enjoy the plaudits their teams receive, the rest of the game is going into decline. Many, many players have been signed from lower league teams and gone on to become stars for those in the Super League, so where will the next of those players be found if lower clubs go to the wall ?

I suppose it depends on people's priorities .... self interest or overall interest ?

Yes, as an Oldham supporter I would love them to be top of the league and win the cup, but what would be the point if that was just for a fleeting moment in time and that it was as part of a scheme which ultimately saw the game itself disappear ?

Edited by RL does what Sky says

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

My gut feeling is that the majority wouldn't want to give any dispensation. I may be wide of the mark with that, but unfortunately I think too many of the SL clubs make decisions based on their own interests rather than the wider interests of the competition and the game. More to the point, I'm not sure that 5 million a year would be enough to guarantee London success - my guess is that it would cost a fair bit more than that!

It remains to be seen what will happen with Toronto and Argyle in the longer term. I can't see him being too keen on flirting with relegation, so the question may be whether there ends up being pressure to ring-fence the SL again, or whether a breakaway competition ends up being formed. It's probably all tied in with the private equity scenario as well.

I too believe we will see a ring fenced SL in the future , that's when I'll have problems again 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, RL does what Sky says said:

Agreed. That is why I have fears for the future of the game itself. If the Super League clubs continue to forge ahead and leave the rest behind then I believe the base of the RL pyramid (ie the local clubs and communities who have had the support of those with an interest in RL for decades gone by) will crumble away and take with them the players and supporters who would otherwise have been the future lifeblood of the game - and then where will the Super League clubs get their next batch of rising stars from ?

I believe RL will never become the national game that many want it to be (and I myself really do wish it was) but maybe it might be time to decide if we want to keep trying to force other parts of the country to accept it as such or should we concentrate on providing the game to those areas where the people really want and appreciate it ?

I  believe that the game is on a presipice, depending on which way the SL clubs decide is the best way forward post this present TV agreement we enjoy, the decision makers can be insular and look after number one, or preserve what we have all been told for years that the 'family bond' we enjoy in our sport still exists.

We have already had Mr Leneghan voice his disapproval of any monies being awarded to clubs below SL level, I believe that if it had been available for SL to put that into place in 2018 for the 2019 season they would have done so but the terms of the contract prevented that from happening, I am not sure that will be the case come the next 'deal'. If it does happen it will in my opinion automatically follow that we will have another closed shop, be that in the form of those incumbent in SL at the time or another round of licencing takes place through application I am not to sure.

But what I do think is if we again 'ring fence' a top division that will be the game in this country slipping down the wrong side of that precipice into oblivion, it will start slowly but it will gather monentum as the snowball effect does. The Championship has come on leaps and bounds since it was an ailing patient ebbing away under the 'closed shop' it was given the injection of hope (P&R) that clubs could work towards, since 2015 interest has increased significantly and crowds have been increasing, take away P&R and watch it relapse, interest will once again wain in the clubs outside of SL, spectator's will fall off - as they did previously under licensing - in time towns will lose the focal point of their pro clubs and the community game will suffer and as you state the conveyor belt will slow and in turn SL clubs will suffer.

And to all those - mainly fans of SL clubs - who say the Championships can have their own vibrant competition, I will point them in the direction of the Club Owners/Chairmen who finance these clubs, these men/ladies in the main are the local's who have made good, in that they have a drive, an enthusiasm, a vision and a target to aim for, in buisness they have had the opportunity to go as far as they can, close that Rugby League pathway down and they just well may say "what's the point" there are other things I can spend my money on, I know I would. People who have never been in buisness can't grasp this mentality, it is beyond their comprehension, they are far happier being led other than leading. 

As Robthegasman says come the end of the 2021 season a new chapter will dawn for the game but will it be as the Labour party said, "For the many, not the few"?

Edited by Harry Stottle
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

I too believe we will see a ring fenced SL in the future , that's when I'll have problems again 

You won't be on your own Gubby, and it won't be only us Leythers saying that many fans of the Championship clubs will as before under licensing take the same attitude.

If the foundations are allowed to crumble the shiney bit above ground will eventually crumble, and it will be of their own making.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see league 1 properly supported by the RFL and clubs in the league given an opportunity to thrive. Cutting the league to 11 teams has been a disaster for the league with the awful 1895 Cup a terrible alternative for loss of fixtures. 

I'd also like to see clubs outside the heartlands given appropriate levels of support to succeed. There is a sink or swim mentality to expansion and clubs like Coventry, Skolars and West Wales are up against it before a ball is even kicked. These clubs get no extra funding and no additional assistance to help develop the game. The Midlands has seen academy and sky try funding withdrawn in the last few years with no alternatives. If these 3 clubs are to continue to develop then they need more support 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...