Re: Franchise : Wed Jul 20, 2011 2:35 pm  

Wildthing wrote:

Oi Git!
C*s are not the bigger neighbours you cheeky get, oh and we have a scoreboard!
The rest ain't far off.

See , you're enjoying yourself more down here already ps I said a scoreboard , not a blackboard with some bits of wood with numbers on

Re: Franchise : Wed Jul 20, 2011 2:45 pm  

Leeeigh Leeeigh wrote:

Point I was making is ok RFL are bad and should be strung up, but the question actually was.......?

It gets very tedious when everything is "Knowing RFL......", "Changing goal posts...." etc about every subject. So ok we can accept Toulouse didn't work out as hoped - it was worth a go though (you might disagree like many more). 1.2million wherever that figure comes from didn't come out of the championship clubs coffers so no worries. 1.2million is not a lot of money either spread between the clubs as I know this is probably what you are thinking. I would say some kind of overall marketing may have helped us lot - but 1.2million still wouldn't do much.

The reported figure of 400k a year came from the RFL themselves. As for that figure making little difference i and probably AT would disagree. £20k per club would make a big difference to championship clubs. That figure would probably cover the contract payments of 2 or 3 part time players or it could have meant 4 months that AT did not have to pump his own money in. When a club gets less than 100k from the RFL that would have been on increase of more than 20% in central funding

[Wildthing]

Re: Franchise : Wed Jul 20, 2011 2:57 pm  

Starbug wrote:

See , you're enjoying yourself more down here already ps I said a scoreboard , not a blackboard with some bits of wood with numbers on

I have always enjoyed it down here. Great lot the Leythers (apart from you SB!)

Anyway, our scoreboard keeps the score. Pedant!

Re: Franchise : Wed Jul 20, 2011 3:20 pm  

DemonUK wrote:

The reported figure of 400k a year came from the RFL themselves. As for that figure making little difference i and probably AT would disagree. £20k per club would make a big difference to championship clubs. That figure would probably cover the contract payments of 2 or 3 part time players or it could have meant 4 months that AT did not have to pump his own money in. When a club gets less than 100k from the RFL that would have been on increase of more than 20% in central funding

This is where we will always differ in opinion. What you post here is all about spreading thinly a low amount of money to be begin with instead of investing it into the game. Real grass roots should get any money like this if available before any professional club that will squander it on the bottomless pit of of player contracts. Its up to the clubs themselves to sort out player contracts. To me that is a given.

Re: Franchise : Wed Jul 20, 2011 3:48 pm  

Thats fine by me LL. Figures are all relative and i was just pointing out that that money works out at quite a large proportion of what champ clubs get anyway. Either way it was money lost to grass roots too

Re: Franchise : Wed Jul 20, 2011 6:47 pm  

Wildthing wrote:

Oops, apologies.

I better start getting it right didn't I?!

You can start by changing your sig mate .

Oh and i'd get cas,Wakey and salford down here and get TO up thee're out road.

Re: Franchise : Wed Jul 20, 2011 8:04 pm  

Leigh will be getting a licence next week, Wakey will be staying up - 2 clubs will not be in SL 2012

Re: Franchise : Wed Jul 20, 2011 8:10 pm  

maurice wrote:

Leigh will be getting a licence next week, Wakey will be staying up - 2 clubs will not be in SL 2012

Do we get our money tree as well Mo .

Re: Franchise : Wed Jul 20, 2011 8:35 pm  

j.c wrote:

Do we get our money tree as well Mo .

You do not get back what you freely gave.

Re: Franchise : Wed Jul 20, 2011 9:32 pm  

Tipster Ste wrote:

I've got a novel idea relegate the bottom club???

That is such a good idea don't know why it has n't been thought of before.