Re: The RFL : Fri Apr 01, 2011 8:27 am  

gutterfax wrote:

Wasn't saying it was right.....was explaining why quins are miles ahead of fax in the criteria.....wakefield may well go in july but if fax are to replace a second team.....quins won't be that team.

Just a simple question here - how can they maintain a ful time SL squad with those attendances? Sure - other bodies will be pumping money in through investment and sponsorship but is this viable long term? By the way - i could ask this question to 4 or 5 other SL clubs too.

Re: The RFL : Fri Apr 01, 2011 8:28 am  

gutterfax wrote:

Wasn't saying it was right.....was explaining why quins are miles ahead of fax in the criteria.....wakefield may well go in july but if fax are to replace a second team.....quins won't be that team.

I am not bitter about the decision, it didnt surprise me, nor should it have surpised anyone else.

But you didnt explain why quins are miles ahead of fax....

Quins home attendances are dire, for superleague and we would almost certainly exceed this. Their away attendances are even more dire, we would absolutely exceed this. Okay so their stadium is good (ours is of a standard now) and they are miles and miles from any other club, which is in their favour for expansionism. Financially they are supported by a wealthy backer, who has put around £7M of his own money into the venture, so I would suggest that Halifax are better placed than them to support themselves.

I cant comment on their youth structure, as I dont know what theirs is, but the powers that be do bang on about the odd londoner playing in superleague. We also have Halifax born players playing in both superleague and the NRL and we were not allowed to run a youth team last year (RFL ruling), but we have started an under 23's this year and we do a great deal of work with amateur clubs and school clubs, so I would suggest we could go toe to toe with them on this issue.

So where does this make their bid better than ours??? I tell you why.... Because SKY will dictate that the RLF need to maintain a presence in the capital in order to secure the deal.

Re: The RFL : Fri Apr 01, 2011 8:29 am  

RED LEAGUE wrote:

so to say you are better placed is just ignorant.

And equally, your knowledge of what position Fax are in is equally ignorant. We probably have the same potential as Salford. We certainly did in the past and Salford haven't advanced much since those days - not if you cmompare how Hull and Warrington have that's for sure. The Barton project may change this but the jury's out.

Re: The RFL : Fri Apr 01, 2011 8:51 am  

deardo wrote:

Shelfsox-on field performance was only 1 part of the application, if it was the only point, do you not think Widnes would have pumped cash after cash into their 1st team? The application had many parts, of which your team did not match up on. Take a step back and think about it. Like i say, if on field performance was the only point, Widnes would have filled their team with stars and won hands down because they have the cash to do it.

I appreciate there are lots of other parts taken into consideration and said in my post that Widnes deserve it for the off-field criteria. My point was the fact that the RFL mentioned Widnes' onfield success in their pre-prepared statement (wrote in 2009) when what little success they have had was couple of years ago and Fax had been more consistent over the past 3 years and are current champions, they should not have used 'onfield' as a factor when they were explaining the decision. That is just insulting.

RED LEAGUE wrote:

The rest have bigger crowds will have on par/better stadiums than fax when complete. Fax don't have a good academy or youth set up like nearly all the SL teams and most of all all those clubs will have more money and be financially better off

They have bigger crowds due in part to larger away followings, our crowds will go up too if in SL with more home fans turning up to see the better teams too. "When complete" - that is the key isn't it, these new stadiums were submitted as CAD drawings 3 years ago and not a spade in the ground yet! We had no academy/youth set up because the RFL blocked Championship clubs from doing so! And with larger crowds, more TV income and more sponsors we will have more money and be financially better off than some of the current incumbents in the league! Vicious circle though, we can't do all this without getting into SL first....

Re: The RFL : Fri Apr 01, 2011 9:15 am  

shelfsox wrote: I appreciate there are lots of other parts taken into consideration and said in my post that Widnes deserve it for the off-field criteria. My point was the fact that the RFL mentioned Widnes' onfield success in their pre-prepared statement (wrote in 2009) when what little success they have had was couple of years ago and Fax had been more consistent over the past 3 years and are current champions, they should not have used 'onfield' as a factor when they were explaining the decision. That is just insulting. They have bigger crowds due in part to larger away followings, our crowds will go up too if in SL with more home fans turning up to see the better teams too. "When complete" - that is the key isn't it, these new stadiums were submitted as CAD drawings 3 years ago and not a spade in the ground yet! We had no academy/youth set up because the RFL blocked Championship clubs from doing so! And with larger crowds, more TV income and more sponsors we will have more money and be financially better off than some of the current incumbents in the league! Vicious circle though, we can't do all this without getting into SL first.... I suggest you drive over the Barton bridge on the M60 and look left you'll see more than a spade in the ground pal. www.reds.co.uk check the webcam.

shelfsox wrote: I appreciate there are lots of other parts taken into consideration and said in my post that Widnes deserve it for the off-field criteria. My point was the fact that the RFL mentioned Widnes' onfield success in their pre-prepared statement (wrote in 2009) when what little success they have had was couple of years ago and Fax had been more consistent over the past 3 years and are current champions, they should not have used 'onfield' as a factor when they were explaining the decision. That is just insulting. They have bigger crowds due in part to larger away followings, our crowds will go up too if in SL with more home fans turning up to see the better teams too. "When complete" - that is the key isn't it, these new stadiums were submitted as CAD drawings 3 years ago and not a spade in the ground yet! We had no academy/youth set up because the RFL blocked Championship clubs from doing so! And with larger crowds, more TV income and more sponsors we will have more money and be financially better off than some of the current incumbents in the league! Vicious circle though, we can't do all this without getting into SL first.... I suggest you drive over the Barton bridge on the M60 and look left you'll see more than a spade in the ground pal. www.reds.co.uk check the webcam.

Re: The RFL : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:22 am  

drove past yesterday and looking ok from what saw.

Re: The RFL : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:27 am  

more yorkshire clubs then lancs clubs, it makes sense i understand i would be anoyed by not getting a licence in my opinion halifax should still get a linence, get rid of wakefield and another team

Re: The RFL : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:29 am  

RED LEAGUE wrote:

The only teams Fax are better placed than are Quins and Wrexham Crusaiders. The rest have bigger crowds will have on par/better stadiums than fax when complete. Fax don't have a good academy or youth set up like nearly all the SL teams and most of all all those clubs will have more money and be financially better off , so to say you are better placed is just ignorant.

If Fax or any other team were to be in Super League then their crowds would be higher,more home support and a lot more away support from the bigger following from SL clubs.

Were's the logic in comparing the crowd levels from a current SL team to a Championship side.

Bigger crowds generates more money, more money from SL, more sponsership etc, so were's the logic in comparing the finances from a curent SL club to a championship club.

Sorry mate but there isn't any.

Re: The RFL : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:38 am  

I would love for a few of these SL muppets to know what its like to be cast adrift in the Championship.
I just cannot wait now to hear the next installment of the spineless charlatans at Red Hall. July cannot come soon enough for me.

Re: The RFL : Fri Apr 01, 2011 10:56 am  

gutterfax wrote:

Wasn't saying it was right.....was explaining why quins are miles ahead of fax in the criteria.....wakefield may well go in july but if fax are to replace a second team.....quins won't be that team.

I didn't mean that , I meant is it right that because a club is unhappy , and voices its unhappiness at a decision that is held against them as you suggest

How childish would that be , surely an organisation like the RFL should be able to rise above that ? , you are suggesting they aren't

You will also say that a club should rise above public criticism , well you are right , except if that club has spent tens of 1,000's of pounds and the jobs of its workers put in jeapody and the emotions of its lifelong customers are treated with distain , it is possibly a bit understandable

Wouldn't you say ?

Or in your opinion are the RFL beyond criticism ? maybe they could get Mr Gadaffi as the next CEO , he'll be out of a job shortly