WWW.RLFANS.COM

Hope you holiday trip went well. Thanks for the reply.

I really enjoyed it thanks.
I have family that relocated to Perth two years ago, but due to work and finances I have been unable to visit until now.


What an amazing place, loved every minute I was out there and cant wait to return.

I don't believe Carl would have deliberately lied knowing he was going to vote the other way, assuming the reports that he did are true. I don't see what he would have gained, although I may be missing something.

Rather he believed what he was saying when he wrote the article; then either the offer was changed, his bosses told him how they expect him to vote or he was convinced otherwise to vote with it another way.

My guess is that given his contacts within the game he will have sought out advice and taken his decision given the change that will be taking place. There is a lot of belt tightening to come I believe and I am confident that this club will be ok and most certainly better than some others outside of SL.

Personally I'm surprised everyone is chasing their tails over this and not questioning the conduct and integrity of the League Express as I have read they published an article naming who had voted for what in a secret ballot.

Either the article they put out is pure BS which I have read the Coventry chairman claims it is, meaning this is surely a breach of their Journalistic integrity and I would assume the named clubs would be entitled to damages due to Libel, defamation of character etc.

Or the paper have gone and published names of who voted for what on a secret ballot. Surely this is a breach of some kind of voting regulation, both the receiving of said data and publishing it? Afterall I assume the point of it being secret is to protect its integrity so that voters can vote how they choose without the fear of reprisals.

Have not, in this scenario, the League Express in effect tampered with all future votes by providing the tacit threat that your votes will be exposed to the media.

Surely this behaviour (and the small matter of how that information was obtained - if indeed it was) is of greater importance than who voted for what and why?

At the moment everyone seems to be talking about the smokescreen of the names without mentioning that whichever way you look at it, be the names correct or not, it is a very big no-no for them to have been published in the first place.

Journalistic integrity! Good one!

(Although seriously, good points, would be interesting to know the legalities. I presume it comes down to the terms and conditions of the governing body and the way they manage their votes

He probably changed his mind when that third promotion place came up for grabs subject to the restructuring proposal being ratified.
Too good to turn down.