|
|
Marwan
May 18, 2016 11:24:04 GMT
Post by Carnster on May 18, 2016 11:24:04 GMT
I think he made quite a lot of valid points and was certainly very open from his side about the SC issues. I think it would be best for the sport to have a totally independent tribunal body to rule on these issues. It makes the sport more forward thinking and less open to questionable dealings. The sloppiness of the registering and de-registering of players that he has highlighted (regardless of fault) shows that the whole system needs tightening-up. It certainly seems that 'breaches' are fairly common, but whether you are 'prosecuted' on them seems like a lottery. Unless you're a 'big' club, Yorkshire based, or have influence over the powers that be. *cough*Uncle Gary*cough*
It seems that support is growing for SL Clubs to go it alone without the RFL if things don't change. If a no confidence vote goes ahead it may at least force the RFL to start bucking its ideas up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Marwan
May 18, 2016 11:34:18 GMT
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2016 11:34:18 GMT
There is one nightmare outcome from all this.
The the teams force a break from the RFL and Hetherington calls in the Yorkshire vote, that would make the frying pan seem like a decent option.
|
|
|
|
Marwan
May 18, 2016 13:00:46 GMT
Post by bonitared on May 18, 2016 13:00:46 GMT
It was hardly explosive,was it ?
Is having a 'technical breach' like being nearly pregnant. It's either a breach or it isn't
If he's right that the breach was only for a week,then what games did we play in that period and what were the results.
I think his strongest point is that the RFL,who aren't going anywhere incidentally, gave misleading information to the tribunal
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Marwan
May 18, 2016 14:44:31 GMT
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2016 14:44:31 GMT
It was hardly explosive,was it ? Is having a 'technical breach' like being nearly pregnant. It's either a breach or it isn't If he's right that the breach was only for a week,then what games did we play in that period and what were the results. I think his strongest point is that the RFL,who aren't going anywhere incidentally, gave misleading information to the tribunal What about the club that was £150000 over cap,yet no action taken............. How explosive do you want something? |
|
|
|
Marwan
May 18, 2016 15:18:03 GMT
Post by jgr on May 18, 2016 15:18:03 GMT
I was disappointed that he didn't name the club that was over the cap, or name the RFL representative that attended meetings with said club regarding their breach. I thought that was the purpose of today to make individuals positions untenable, but perhaps MK has been advised from his legal team not to do this for whatever reason.
I also thought it was quite shocking how we were offered money to move our game against a top 4 club.
|
|
|
|
Marwan
May 18, 2016 15:27:25 GMT
Post by bonitared on May 18, 2016 15:27:25 GMT
Just to be clear,then.
As I understand it we haven't yet appealed against the points deduction and MK gave no indication that he had widespread support from other chairman.
If the rules for an appeal are that you need to say on what basis you're appealing,he can just send them the transcript of the bit about only being in breach for a week.
I repeat that his strongest point,cutting through the usual noise, is that he reckons that the judge found against us because the RFL had given him duff information
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Marwan
May 18, 2016 16:30:33 GMT
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2016 16:30:33 GMT
Can't see the legal eagles letting him say the things he did if there wasn't some evidence somewhere, I'm wondering if it's being held back to produce at the meeting of the chairmen/owners to assist the desired effect of the no confidence vote being accepted.
I'd forgotten about the substantial amount of money to move the game, I'm assuming that it was the Wigan away game this year, you'd think the RFL would only offer that to the Doc if it was 100% above board and legal, can't see them offering him something like that if he could use it against them one day.
Couldn't hear it to well but what was the story of the hospital bill? surely paying £2000 for a players wives medical expenses isn't against the cap? Think that ones sounds incredibly tenuous.
|
|
|
|
Marwan
May 20, 2016 8:53:38 GMT
Post by redwolf on May 20, 2016 8:53:38 GMT
My understanding was that the ''technical breach'' was down to rfl's administrative incompetence involving registering and de-registering players when told
|
|
|
|
Post by russ on May 22, 2016 12:51:01 GMT
I think he made quite a lot of valid points and was certainly very open from his side about the SC issues. I think it would be best for the sport to have a totally independent tribunal body to rule on these issues. It makes the sport more forward thinking and less open to questionable dealings. The sloppiness of the registering and de-registering of players that he has highlighted (regardless of fault) shows that the whole system needs tightening-up. It certainly seems that 'breaches' are fairly common, but whether you are 'prosecuted' on them seems like a lottery. Unless you're a 'big' club, Yorkshire based, or have influence over the powers that be. *cough*Uncle Gary*cough* It seems that support is growing for SL Clubs to go it alone without the RFL if things don't change. If a no confidence vote goes ahead it may at least force the RFL to start bucking its ideas up. Although the Doc attracts the attention of idiots who can't see the points he is making for their chance to insult or belittle him, he makes loads of sensible points that are lost in the crush of people trying to make out he's something he's not! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Marwan
May 22, 2016 13:03:07 GMT
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2016 13:03:07 GMT
Just thinking about this, if the RFL were 100% certain they are in the right they would have been much more vocal since the press conference in denying the allegations, think the phrase is the silence is deafening.
|
|
|
|
Marwan
May 22, 2016 13:15:08 GMT
Post by Carnster on May 22, 2016 13:15:08 GMT
I think he made quite a lot of valid points and was certainly very open from his side about the SC issues. I think it would be best for the sport to have a totally independent tribunal body to rule on these issues. It makes the sport more forward thinking and less open to questionable dealings. The sloppiness of the registering and de-registering of players that he has highlighted (regardless of fault) shows that the whole system needs tightening-up. It certainly seems that 'breaches' are fairly common, but whether you are 'prosecuted' on them seems like a lottery. Unless you're a 'big' club, Yorkshire based, or have influence over the powers that be. *cough*Uncle Gary*cough* It seems that support is growing for SL Clubs to go it alone without the RFL if things don't change. If a no confidence vote goes ahead it may at least force the RFL to start bucking its ideas up. Although the Doc attracts the attention of idiots who can't see the points he is making for their chance to insult or belittle him, he makes loads of sensible points that are lost in the crush of people trying to make out he's something he's not! I think you're right here. MK is a divisive figure at the best of times which probably doesn't help his cause. Also, the fact that he isn't the most articulate of speakers (Understandable as he isn't a native English speaker) does him no favours. He'd do well, especially when discussing matters such as the SC breach, to perhaps have a decent spokesperson to add a little bit of professionalism to the whole affair. Something similar to this happened when Sheens came over permanently. You would have members of the press deliberately winding MK up and being generally disrespectful whenever MK talked RL. It all suddenly changed when Sheens was at his side and all that nonsense suddenly stopped. He needs someone similar to have his back when he talks about anything affecting the Club outside of the playing side of things. |
|
|
|
Marwan
May 24, 2016 3:18:44 GMT
Post by russ on May 24, 2016 3:18:44 GMT
I think a lack of respect generally is a big issue in the game. I believe that it has looked almost orchestrated when it comes to MK.It's not him that's divisive it's just the level of nastiness that divides RL from real discussion on a forum or real story in the press. Have you seen any article about Marwan that didn't begin with words like outspoken or controversial and all of them continue in that way! Whatever his ability as a speaker he should have a right to an opinion!
|
|
|
|
Marwan
May 25, 2016 8:27:34 GMT
Post by bandgeekmafia78 on May 25, 2016 8:27:34 GMT
|
|
|
|
Marwan
May 25, 2016 9:26:17 GMT
Post by Carnster on May 25, 2016 9:26:17 GMT
That could be really interesting news for us. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Marwan
May 25, 2016 12:04:19 GMT
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2016 12:04:19 GMT
Going to cause havoc though if they overturn the decision, someone somewhere will contest it and before you know it you have the probable outcome of the last game of the season passing and it not being clear who is top 8 or middle 8. Best outcome is we play like demons for the rest of the season and make the top 8 without getting the points back, that way there is less chance of the game becoming even more of a laughing stock than it already is.
The RFL must be very sure of their initial decision to allow this, mind you the club must be equally sure to have called for it, my hope is the Doc employs the best legal team and lets them get on with it with no further comment from him on the subject, either officially or on anti social media.
|
|
