Greg Florimos Boots wrote:
He was uncomfortable to say the least.
Still though days go by and the Fax board still havnt published the RFL panels findings. Its time to let people make up their own minds with some hard evidence otherwise people are going to look kind of stupid. Its time to prove to people that our application wasnt as badly put together as some people are making out.
The thing is though GFB is that you , I , or anybody reasonable could put together a comprehensive SL application in little more than a Few pages , 10 at most
So is this supposed criticism based on the way the application was done ? Or on the content of the application ?
It is the content that is the important bit , not how it is worded , not how many pretty pictures of ' virtual stadiums ' or even old stadiums with ' virtual temporary stands '
Not how many pages of bull crap giving fanciful business plans
Fax handed their application to the RFL back in march , if it wasn't up to scratch then surely the RFL should have in private told your BOD , and either asked them to withdraw it , or re submit another
Or are they suggesting they only looked at it on last Tuesday morning after the Crusaders withdrawal ?
Funnily enough my last point could be closer to the truth than we think