Beaumont and you all know he is correct.

[Dave T]

26 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

But this is the point.  He said that FC finishing bottom would not mean anything.

That's not actually what he said. 

, "we all know that had Hull FC finished bottom, they could not get relegated because of their A Grade"

 

[Dave T]

Just now, Harry Stottle said:

Then could there be another legal challenge, this getting more interesting all the time.

 

There was no legal challenge last time the team in 11th was relegated, I expect there wouldn't be one this time.

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Chrispmartha said:

There wouldn’t have been any legal challenge, it was all just hot air from Derek, bit like his breakaway league nonsense.

Oh, I don't know about that!

[RP London]

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Oh, I don't know about that!

do you honestly believe, with everything that is said about how good a businessman beaumont is, that he would take legal action over the league that you signed up to play in following the clear and obvious rules that it laid out quite plainly when you agreed to play in it (which you do when you kick off the season etc).. I dont overly like Beaumont's outspoken actions but I do take them for what they are which is a lot of hot air, also respect what he has done at Leigh with shrewd business decisions, I dont think spending money taking legal action over something like this is really in that wheel house do you?

[Harry Stottle]

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

There was no legal challenge last time the team in 11th was relegated, I expect there wouldn't be one this time.

True, but we weren't in this system, being relegated from 11th wasn't that when we were in the 8's? Happy to be corrected.

If it was the 8's that was a much more transparent system, we could see it unfolding on the field of play, and everyone new the consequences of losing games.

[Dave T]

Just now, Harry Stottle said:

True, but we weren't in this system, being relegated from 11th wasn't that when we were in the 8's? Happy to be corrected.

If it was the 8's that was a much more transparent system, we could see it unfolding on the field of play, and everyone new the consequences of losing games.

The case I mean was when Catalans were protected in 2006 and Cas were relegated. In 2004 we relegated two teams to make way for Catalans (to maintain one up from NL1. 

[Harry Stottle]

9 minutes ago, RP London said:

I dont think spending money taking legal action over something like this is really in that wheel house do you?

I shouldn't think so but don't forget he is a madman, lots of people will happily confirm who pen these pages.

[RP London]

Just now, Harry Stottle said:

I shouldn't think so but don't forget he is a madman, lots of people will happily confirm who pen these pages.

So you're just trolling then when you're making the legal action comments.. fair enough, dont blame you in a way just wanted to check as didnt think you were the type to see this as a wise move. 

I think most people have similar feelings to me, a respect for what he has done for Leigh but not necessarily for his antics on twitter etc where he is trying to make points he just doesnt seem to execute it well.

[Harry Stottle]

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The case I mean was when Catalans were protected in 2006 and Cas were relegated. In 2004 we relegated two teams to make way for Catalans (to maintain one up from NL1. 

Yes quite, I didn't think that was correct then and still don't think it is correct today, I have never been an advocate of protecting any team that plays in the same league and scores less points on a league ladder, as I argued on these pages prior to IMG getting on board and there were those who were calling for Toulouse and Catalan to be protected whilst still operating a P&R system for the other 10 SL clubs, complete total stupidity in my opinion.

 

[Dunbar]

37 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

But not because they have got a grade A, they haven't got a grade yet. They could get a grade B and not be ‘relegated’.

I think that’s Dave's point.

 

I think I would have stopped by now if I was arguing my own points so I will certainly stop when it is someone else's point.

[Chrispmartha]

40 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Oh, I don't know about that!

There’s literally no basis for one, it wouldn’t have happened. Who would Derek bring legal action against and for what?

[Chrispmartha]

19 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yes quite, I didn't think that was correct then and still don't think it is correct today, I have never been an advocate of protecting any team that plays in the same league and scores less points on a league ladder, as I argued on these pages prior to IMG getting on board and there were those who were calling for Toulouse and Catalan to be protected whilst still operating a P&R system for the other 10 SL clubs, complete total stupidity in my opinion.

 

Maybe (i thoroughly disagree) but there was no legal action, which was the point being made.

[Leyther_Matt]

22 hours ago, Dave T said:

The case I mean was when Catalans were protected in 2006 and Cas were relegated. In 2004 we relegated two teams to make way for Catalans (to maintain one up from NL1. 

2005 was the year two went down, Dave (Leigh and Widnes).

Of course it was deliberately designed to make it even more difficult for Leigh to stay up that year as it meant we had to finish 10th instead of the previous aim of 11th or bust!

[Dave T]

12 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:

2005 was the year two went down, Dave (Leigh and Widnes).

Of course it was deliberately designed to make it even more difficult for Leigh to stay up that year as it meant we had to finish 10th instead of the previous aim of 11th or bust!

Yes sorry, I seem to have missed 2005 out there!

[JohnM]

Based on the responses to the o.p. it's about time the title of this topic was changed from Beaumont and you all know he is correct

to

Beaumont and you all know he is incorrect.

[RP London]

4 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Based on the responses to the o.p. it's about time the title of this topic was changed from Beaumont and you all know he is correct

to

Beaumont and you all know he is incorrect.

or Beaumont and a small minority of us think he is correct. 

or Caligula - madman or just a little off?

[Griff]

..

Edited October 2 by Griff

[Griff]

1 hour ago, JohnM said:

Based on the responses to the o.p. it's about time the title of this topic was changed from Beaumont and you all know he is correct

to

Beaumont and you all know he is incorrect.

After fourteen pages, I've forgotten what he was supposed to be correct about.