Jump to content

How can Bradford apply for SL when they were on their ass in 2019?

The Daddy

By The Daddy
in The General Rugby League Forum

Recommended Posts

The Daddy

The Daddy

Posted
Posted

Surprised that they're applying for the vacant 12th spot. Weren't they in a financial predicament last year, before Nigel Wood and Eric Perez assisted them in their hour of need.

Also, how can Odsal be good enough for SL but not good enough for the Championship? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 236
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Gooleboy

Gooleboy

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, The Daddy said:

Surprised that they're applying for the vacant 12th spot. Weren't they in a financial predicament last year, before Nigel Wood and Eric Perez assisted them in their hour of need.

Also, how can Odsal be good enough for SL but not good enough for the Championship? 

 

Fair point, I haven't been to Odsal for three years and it was in a poor state then. God only knows how much needs spending on it to bring it up to scratch. Maybe the RFL holding the lease for it has some bearing on them applying. As I said on another thread, Bradford fans don't seem to think the Club is in a position to apply at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oxford

Oxford

Posted
Posted

The answer is they put in their application and best case and wait to be rewarded!

And mention how many more people you'll bring to visit other grounds every other sentence.

Shoe in!

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:  Non-Political

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
M j M

M j M

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, The Daddy said:

Surprised that they're applying for the vacant 12th spot. Weren't they in a financial predicament last year, before Nigel Wood and Eric Perez assisted them in their hour of need.

Also, how can Odsal be good enough for SL but not good enough for the Championship? 

 

Nobody has ever said Odsal wasn't good enough for the Championship?

Let's be honest, a stable Bradford are the club most of the other SL clubs would like to see back in. Unfortunately the timing is probably off for them by a couple of years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davo5

Davo5

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, The Daddy said:

Surprised that they're applying for the vacant 12th spot. Weren't they in a financial predicament last year, before Nigel Wood and Eric Perez assisted them in their hour of need.

Also, how can Odsal be good enough for SL but not good enough for the Championship? 

 

If they would take George Burgess back I’d vote for them !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Griff

Griff

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Oxford said:

The answer is they put in their application and best case and wait to be rewarded!

And mention how many more people you'll bring to visit other grounds every other sentence.

Shoe in!

Shoo in.

It's nothing to do with shoes.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oxford

Oxford

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Griff said:

Shoo in.

It's nothing to do with shoes.

Well you're a shoe in for Pedant of the Pandemic!😉

"person,place,or thing that is obvious.
He is a shoe in for the job.
The location for her new store is a shoe in.
Their idea for solving the personnel problem is a shoe in." Urban Dictionary

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:  Non-Political

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Griff

Griff

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Oxford said:

Well you're a shoe in for Pedant of the Pandemic!😉

"person,place,or thing that is obvious.
He is a shoe in for the job.
The location for her new store is a shoe in.
Their idea for solving the personnel problem is a shoe in." Urban Dictionary

The Urban Dictionary 🤣🤣🤣

Fount of all knowledge.

https://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-sho1.htm

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oxford

Oxford

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Griff said:

The Urban Dictionary 🤣🤣🤣

Fount of all knowledge.

https://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-sho1.htm

"Most sources consider it a mistake, but it has become more common over the last few decades."

https://writingexplained.org/shoo-in-or-shoe-in

There are lots of sources and languages changes even because of inherent mistakes.

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:  Non-Political

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Griff

Griff

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Oxford said:

"Most sources consider it a mistake, but it has become more common over the last few decades."

https://writingexplained.org/shoo-in-or-shoe-in

There are lots of sources and languages changes even because of inherent mistakes.

Please don't try to excuse poor standards of English.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RP London

RP London

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Griff said:

Please don't try to excuse poor standards of English.

we are digressing massivly here but... 

where do you draw the line here.. English, like every language, evolves. The English of today is very different to the English of 1880, spelling, grammar and meaning all change through time and they always have. The "e" on the end of words like Olde, the interchanging of f and ss.. the fact that pronunciation changes too (as talked about in another thread with Herb and the "American" dropping of the H which was actually the English adding it to be less French when we were at war with them almost constantly)... 

i dont disagree some things really get my goat but the language will evolve whether we like it or not.. and to say its poor english maybe misses the fact that what we are typing and saying now is also poor English to someone from generations before us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Griff

Griff

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, RP London said:

we are digressing massivly here but... 

where do you draw the line here.. English, like every language, evolves. The English of today is very different to the English of 1880, spelling, grammar and meaning all change through time and they always have. The "e" on the end of words like Olde, the interchanging of f and ss.. the fact that pronunciation changes too (as talked about in another thread with Herb and the "American" dropping of the H which was actually the English adding it to be less French when we were at war with them almost constantly)... 

i dont disagree some things really get my goat but the language will evolve whether we like it or not.. and to say its poor english maybe misses the fact that what we are typing and saying now is also poor English to someone from generations before us. 

The long s - which looks like an f - was never an f.  It was just how s was written.

Saying "would of", "should of" and "could of" instead of "would have", "could have" and "should have", doesn't make you a trail blazing innovator.

It just means you can't tell the difference between a verb and a preposition.

Personally, I haven't got over the lack of use of the second person singular.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tommygilf

Tommygilf

Posted
Posted

Bradford are suffering from a case of LUFC syndrome here. Everyone at the top table misses them as a club and feature of the league (even or perhaps especially the big rivals) and if they could wave a wand they'd put them in tomorrow.

They all miss that the financial basket case and underlying financial problems (ground, overspend etc) behind them being relegated in the first place hasn't been fully addressed and probably would need a good few years back at the top to really get the remaining gremlins out.

That's before you get to Super League offering them half the money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JohnM

JohnM

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Griff said:

The long s - which looks like an f - was never an f.  It was just how s was written.

Saying "would of", "should of" and "could of" instead of "would have", "could have" and "should have", doesn't make you a trail blazing innovator.

It just means you can't tell the difference between a verb and a preposition.

Personally, I haven't got over the lack of use of the second person singular.

Well, I have, tha knows! 🥳

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Harry Stottle

Harry Stottle

Posted
Posted

Why has away support (as in Bradfords case) suddenly become a controlling factor in the selection process, it seems that those who were decrying the need for away fans in their arguments for the inclusion of overseas teams see it as an important requirement in the selction of a replacement 12th team in SL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tommygilf

Tommygilf

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Harry Stottle said:

Why has away support (as in Bradfords case) suddenly become a controlling factor in the selection process, it seems that those who were decrying the need for away fans in their arguments for the inclusion of overseas teams see it as an important requirement in the selction of a replacement 12th team in SL.

Evidently it was important then (though it shouldn't have been). Ironic for you guys now though in this process!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RP London

RP London

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Griff said:

The long s - which looks like an f - was never an f.  It was just how s was written.

Saying "would of", "should of" and "could of" instead of "would have", "could have" and "should have", doesn't make you a trail blazing innovator.

It just means you can't tell the difference between a verb and a preposition.

Personally, I haven't got over the lack of use of the second person singular.

I was aware of the s and f it is the same as with the German B (with the long stick, dont have it set on my keyboard. in the same way as i dont have the f in the correct type face to make the point).. but the point is that it has died out overtime.. 

its not about being an innovator though, it is about the evolution of language. As I said, I would rather some things (like your examples) wouldn't change but then I am sure there have been many who have said that over the past centuries only for them to become outdated dinosaurs... Language will evolve through laziness as much as it will through the take on and bastardisation of other languages into the vernacular due to immigration (as it has always done).. trying to stand in the way is like Cnut trying to hold back the tide. 

in the past the written word was written and read by few which meant you had colloquialisations and almost complete local languages, spoken english for most of the population bore little resemblance to written english. We are seeing this deviation happen less (and colloquialisations becoming less) due to the ability of the population to both read and write (for the most part) but also the proliferation of outside influences on them from outside of their very small town/area, it also means that some of that laziness in speech is making it to the written word thanks to forums and blogs and so on.. not saying this is a good thing but it is a fact of what is happening and (as a social historian) i do find it very interesting... 

to try to bring it back on topic.. RL is of course helping us to keep our colloquialisations simply due to it not having any part of the "proliferation of outside influences!" 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dave T

Dave T

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Griff said:

Shoo in.

It's nothing to do with shoes.

 

1 hour ago, Oxford said:

Well you're a shoe in for Pedant of the Pandemic!😉

"person,place,or thing that is obvious.
He is a shoe in for the job.
The location for her new store is a shoe in.
Their idea for solving the personnel problem is a shoe in." Urban Dictionary

 

1 hour ago, Griff said:

The Urban Dictionary 🤣🤣🤣

Fount of all knowledge.

https://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-sho1.htm

These are the real issues I come here for 🤣 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eddie

Eddie

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Bradford are suffering from a case of LUFC syndrome here. Everyone at the top table misses them as a club and feature of the league (even or perhaps especially the big rivals) and if they could wave a wand they'd put them in tomorrow.

They all miss that the financial basket case and underlying financial problems (ground, overspend etc) behind them being relegated in the first place hasn't been fully addressed and probably would need a good few years back at the top to really get the remaining gremlins out.

That's before you get to Super League offering them half the money.

Nobody missed Leeds Utd mate, everybody enjoyed seeing them flounder for so long! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
paulwalker71

paulwalker71

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Why has away support (as in Bradfords case) suddenly become a controlling factor in the selection process, it seems that those who were decrying the need for away fans in their arguments for the inclusion of overseas teams see it as an important requirement in the selction of a replacement 12th team in SL.

Probably because quite a few current S Lclubs are skint and desperate for a quick cash injection?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.