Salford financial issues(again…)

[binosh]

9 minutes ago, phiggins said:

He does like the odd petty game. But while he talks about the togetherness of the playing group, he’s happy to throw the kids in the reserves under the bus, just because he thinks he’s proving a point

He’s also very quick to distance himself from any controversial or negative stuff in and around a club, he’s happy to throw owners/boards of a club under the bus when there are problems and always offers up the “them and us” mentality. It’s great for shielding the players but never accepts any responsibility himself.

I have said before financial issues follow this guy club to club and it’s noticeable he’s been quiet for months but vocal as soon as an investor appeared on the press.

He’s a master of playing the good guy in public.

[DG70]

Not sure why Salford can't name the same squad as last week if the same regulations apply this week, the circus continues.

[Eddie]

Not sure how this is Salford’s fault, they can’t name their strongest side due to the sustainability cap, I’m sure they’d like to and are more gutted about this than anyone. It’s a terrible look for the sport though and rubbish for fans, shame SL couldn’t step in and lift the cap as the sale is going through. 

[Celtic Roosters]

The greatest sport on the field is an absolute farce off it. I'm not sorry I don't bother so much any more and I fully get why they can't attract new supporters.

[Eddie]

4 hours ago, DG70 said:

Not sure why Salford can't name the same squad as last week if the same regulations apply this week, the circus continues.

Isn’t it different for the CC and SL? 

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Isn’t it different for the CC and SL? 

Nope

[Tommygilf]

7 hours ago, binosh said:

It’s a Paul Rowley tactic, he’s brilliant at the old “backs to wall” mentality. he used it for years at Leigh and he still uses it today, it’s good for galvanising teams but gets very tedious.

Yeah it's noticeable, I just don't think it's all that necessary to be honest. It's certainly not a likeable trait.

[Tommygilf]

44 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Not sure how this is Salford’s fault, they can’t name their strongest side due to the sustainability cap, I’m sure they’d like to and are more gutted about this than anyone. It’s a terrible look for the sport though and rubbish for fans, shame SL couldn’t step in and lift the cap as the sale is going through. 

Salford have the same financial restrictions as last week.

They only got an owner sorted in the past week - that is on them. Even then, if it's not completed and approved then they don't actually have a new owner till that point, so they are still in the situation they were in before.

This squad selection is a total case of throwing toys out of the pram. It's embarrassing given the support Salford have had from the RFL when history shows that level of support wouldn't automatically be forthcoming.

[Expatknight]

20 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Salford have the same financial restrictions as last week.

They only got an owner sorted in the past week - that is on them. Even then, if it's not completed and approved then they don't actually have a new owner till that point, so they are still in the situation they were in before.

This squad selection is a total case of throwing toys out of the pram. It's embarrassing given the support Salford have had from the RFL when history shows that level of support wouldn't automatically be forthcoming.

There is no getting away from it, this is bringing the game into disrepute, it is shameful.

Why are we surprised? For once, the RFL should have the courage to stand up to Salford and say it is totally unacceptable and there will be consequences, otherwise what is the point of any club following the rules. Salford have been given more than a far go over the last few years but continue to make the same errors of judgement, putting it charitably. 

[Charlie]

11 minutes ago, Expatknight said:

There is no getting away from it, this is bringing the game into disrepute, it is shameful.

Why are we surprised? For once, the RFL should have the courage to stand up to Salford and say it is totally unacceptable and there will be consequences, otherwise what is the point of any club following the rules. Salford have been given more than a far go over the last few years but continue to make the same errors of judgement, putting it charitably. 

I don’t disagree but how could you legally prove rowley didn’t pick this team on “form” we all know it’s not and I’m far from happy with that squad. Not sure the rfl can or will do much. My concern is how long this takes for the owner to be cleared. He’s payed of Salfords debts to the council which is great but this should of been sorted sooner

[Dave T]

Not sure i follow Bower's point here

 

[The Masked Poster]

Salford ARE being punished and have NO CHOICE but to field the reserves? That's some complete BS there, he's talking out of his r's. 
 

They are taking the pee, plain and simple. And there should be consequences. 

[Worzel]

8 hours ago, Wakey Til I Die said:

Salford have dropped a large bomb on the image of the game, whilst shooting themselves in the foot at the same time. Opening weekend of the season, on the beeb, the mighty but ailing Saints taking on the perennial over-achievers who have just been taken over. It was all set up nicely and even last weeks Salford team makes it a decent game. But no, they take their bat & ball home again because they can’t get their own way and ruin the event before it begins. And likely screw their points difference up for the season to boot. It will be a miracle if they keep it under 70. They really have used up any sympathy anyone had left. They should be further punished with points deductions, fines or both. 

Salford could have competed and possibly beaten Saints with last week’s team. They could even have named people like Sneyd in the 21 to give another 24 hours to complete the process, and not play them if they didn’t. Lots of things they could have done differently if they were a constructive, cooperative partner interested in what was best for the game.

Instead, just like they have through this whole process, they show a level of arrogant, resentful entitlement. To actively decide to blow up our opening round’s narrative, stick two fingers up at 15,000 people who have already bought tickets (including their own fans), and insult one of our most important media partners, is off-the-scale levels of pompous self-regard. Who do they think they are?

Time to get rid. The culture of the whole club is shot. 

[Dave T]

7 minutes ago, Worzel said:

Salford could have competed and possibly beaten Saints with last week’s team. They could even have named people like Sneyd in the 21 to give another 24 hours to complete the process, and not play them if they didn’t. Lots of things they could have done differently if they were a constructive, cooperative partner interested in what was best for the game.

Instead, just like they have through this whole process, they show a level of arrogant, resentful entitlement. To actively decide to blow up our opening round’s narrative, stick two fingers up at 15,000 people who have already bought tickets (including their own fans), and insult one of our most important media partners, is off-the-scale levels of pompous self-regard. Who do they think they are?

Time to get rid. The culture of the whole club is shot. 

The odd thing about this is that it is meant to be a new regime. 

I don't understand why they are trying to pee away any slight goodwill that they may have.

A superb opening round likely to be trashed by Rowley's petulance. 

[Chrispmartha]

And this is the BBC’s first game of the season.

I’d be fuming if I was a Salford supporter.

[Bull Mania]

43 minutes ago, Charlie said:

I don’t disagree but how could you legally prove rowley didn’t pick this team on “form” we all know it’s not and I’m far from happy with that squad. Not sure the rfl can or will do much. My concern is how long this takes for the owner to be cleared. He’s payed of Salfords debts to the council which is great but this should of been sorted sooner

You can easily prove it. 

A. It's not a court of law so the RFL only need to be of the opinion that Salford have brought the game into dispute. 

B. Even in a court of law it would be fairly easy to prove. Not a single person in this world ever knows what is going in someone's head. But a judge, jury will look at the evidence and make a judgement of whether they believe someones intentions. Looking at the squad, a judge would find it very easy to rule against Salford. 

They won't get a points deduction.  But I'm with Worzel im struggling to see a more deliberate act to hurt the sport than what Salford have done and I find it increomidbly sad. I would have still fancied them go beat saints. That would have been the best F U.

Salford may find a few key member of the RFL are on annual leave next week for the holidays. 

[Worzel]

7 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The odd thing about this is that it is meant to be a new regime. 

I don't understand why they are trying to pee away any slight goodwill that they may have.

A superb opening round likely to be trashed by Rowley's petulance. 

It’s not possible for Rowley to have picked that squad without clearing it with the new owners. Wouldn’t happen.

These are not “partners” we need in our sport. They’ve just answered any “fit and proper person” test we might have wanted to set, in real time. Done us a favour. They might have money but as Porter said “culture eats strategy for breakfast” and we now know what they would be like in other collaborative situations. Not people we can all work with to navigate a challenging journey and grow a successful sport. There are other clubs.

In our business we walk away from opportunities and partners whenever we sense values and behaviours like this. It’s never worth it, whatever the short-term surface-level positives, always goes wrong in the end. 

[Worzel]

9 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

And this is the BBC’s first game of the season.

I’d be fuming if I was a Salford supporter.

Imagine how the BBC feel. In the real world organisations are a collection of people. Within BBC Sport there will be advocates for our game, who are fighting battles internally against others who prefer time and money to be allocated elsewhere. That’s how organisations work. Salford have just smacked those individuals in the face, with a huge stick. 

[Charlie]

8 minutes ago, Bull Mania said:

You can easily prove it. 

A. It's not a court of law so the RFL only need to be of the opinion that Salford have brought the game into dispute. 

B. Even in a court of law it would be fairly easy to prove. Not a single person in this world ever knows what is going in someone's head. But a judge, jury will look at the evidence and make a judgement of whether they believe someones intentions. Looking at the squad, a judge would find it very easy to rule against Salford. 

They won't get a points deduction.  But I'm with Worzel im struggling to see a more deliberate act to hurt the sport than what Salford have done and I find it increomidbly sad. I would have still fancied them go beat saints. That would have been the best F U.

Salford may find a few key member of the RFL are on annual leave next week for the holidays. 

I’m willing to bet nothing will happen 

[Martyn Sadler]

12 hours ago, M j M said:

We have no evidence the RFL could have cleared the takeover more speedily. Four or five working days is a pretty short time to do the sort of work they need to do all the fit and proper tests, especially if the new owners are potentially somewhat contentious on that front.

You're right that the RFL's process on clearing the takeover may take more than just a few days.

But someone at the RFL should also be aware, as I'm sure they are, how vital it is to create a good impression for a match that is to be broadcast live on the BBC on Saturday evening.

So surely it would have been possible to give a dispensation to Salford to play their strongest side on Saturday night, even if the formal process of approving the new owner hasn't yet been completed, with a proviso that it would revert to the previous position if the new owners are not given the green light.

If in the unlikely event of the new ownership not being approved, the RFL could then have adopted the previous position at some point after Saturday's game.

If that is not possible, then the alternative would have been for someone from the RFL or RL Commercial to contact Salford and Paul Rowley to stop him from doing what he's done.

I've made my position on what Paul has done quite clear, but the point about leadership is that you anticipate a crisis and head it off before it happens.

Nobody at the RFL or RL Commercial appears to have tried to do that.

[binosh]

Honestly Salford are now starting to alienate themselves from other clubs, the RFL and now their fans.

This tweet is from one of the clubs representatives and is truly appalling, and it’s to a Salford fan. 

 

[Charlie]

4 minutes ago, binosh said:

Honestly Salford are now starting to alienate themselves from other clubs, the RFL and now their fans.

This tweet is from one of the clubs representatives and is truly appalling, and it’s to a Salford fan. 

 

Not sure what this bloke does at the club but this is poor 

[DG70]

Salford and the RFL are both culpable in this sorry mess and does more damage to an already ailing sport, not a good look at all.

[Worzel]

9 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

You're right that the RFL's process on clearing the takeover may take more than just a few days.

But someone at the RFL should also be aware, as I'm sure they are, how vital it is to create a good impression for a match that is to be broadcast live on the BBC on Saturday evening.

So surely it would have been possible to give a dispensation to Salford to play their strongest side on Saturday night, even if the formal process of approving the new owner hasn't yet been completed, with a proviso that it would revert to the previous position if the new owners are not given the green light.

If in the unlikely event of the new ownership not being approved, the RFL could then have adopted the previous position at some point after Saturday's game.

If that is not possible, then the alternative would have been for someone from the RFL or RL Commercial to contact Salford and Paul Rowley to stop him from doing what he's done.

I've made my position on what Paul has done quite clear, but the point about leadership is that you anticipate a crisis and head it off before it happens.

Nobody at the RFL or RL Commercial appears to have tried to do that.

I think this comes close to victim blaming.

There may well be questions about RFL governance, speed and competence. That’s not news. But it in no way creates any set of circumstances that justify the actions that Salford have taken. They have agency, and are accountable for their choices. 

Even if the RFL could have done better, these events are not their fault. Ultimately Salford still had the ability to field a competitive team, and CHOSE not to do so.

We shouldn’t help them off the hook by letting them blame the victim. That’s what they want, and these irresponsible, sport-damaging actions should be seen for what they are. Wholly Salford’s fault. 

[binosh]

5 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

You're right that the RFL's process on clearing the takeover may take more than just a few days.

But someone at the RFL should also be aware, as I'm sure they are, how vital it is to create a good impression for a match that is to be broadcast live on the BBC on Saturday evening.

So surely it would have been possible to give a dispensation to Salford to play their strongest side on Saturday night, even if the formal process of approving the new owner hasn't yet been completed, with a proviso that it would revert to the previous position if the new owners are not given the green light.

If in the unlikely event of the new ownership not being approved, the RFL could then have adopted the previous position at some point after Saturday's game.

If that is not possible, then the alternative would have been for someone from the RFL or RL Commercial to contact Salford and Paul Rowley to stop him from doing what he's done.

I've made my position on what Paul has done quite clear, but the point about leadership is that you anticipate a crisis and head it off before it happens.

Nobody at the RFL or RL Commercial appears to have tried to do that.

Incorrect in my opinion Martyn, everyone has been critical of the RFL me included, in this situation they are dammed if they do and dammed if they don’t. 

I would have preferred the RFL to have been more decisive straight away months ago, they pandered to Salford more so than most clubs I’ve seen who needed help.

The rules in this instance were clear, 1.2M max! Salford were given clear instruction and ignored it, buried their heads in the sand hoping for a buyer who luckily appeared l, a gamble that paid off but most posters on here were rightly skeptical about the timeframes and buyers even when all the press (including yours) hailed the new owners as saviours. 

It’s not for the RFL to bend their own rules to pander yet again to club who has treated the league with contempts since they got their £500k advance.

Salford knew what was coming, Could have cut costs until completion like every other club has had to do instead they Signed Taiki Chan, the players took the <<oops I tried to get around the swear filter and failed>> on social media, played a good competitive SL team at the Hurricanes and now give a big F-You to the whole game by putting out reserves. 

Shambolic, I hope they get the punishment they deserve.