[tb]

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 9:38 am  

Starbug wrote:

Which was still used for Leigh in 2004 when we were promoted , how do I know this ? , I along with another club Director had to show an RFL official that we complied with that document the week before the 2004 NL 1 GF

HTH

See … you could provide more support for your argument if you could be bothered.

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:07 pm  

Starbug wrote:

Which was still used for Leigh in 2004 when we were promoted , how do I know this ? , I along with another club Director had to show an RFL official that we complied with that document the week before the 2004 NL 1 GF

HTH

post the 2004 rules, then post the 2005 rules

Then show me exactly where the RFL changed of the rules, for the benefit of castleford, and show me your evidence,

Can you do that ?????? No because your full of poop

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:11 pm  

tb wrote:

so: starbug's case is that the promotion criteria under which we were promoted in 2005 differ from the ground standards laid out in the Framing the Future document of 199something or thereabouts. And he offers this as evidence that the RFL changed the rules during 2005 just to benefit us?

It's not the sort of evidence that would fly in a court of law, is it?

He hasnt got a case. some people believe their own poop they spout and he is one of them, He cant back up one thing or by now he would have done.

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:28 pm  

Speedy wrote:

He hasnt got a case. some people believe their own poop they spout and he is one of them, He cant back up one thing or by now he would have done.

Don't forget the bitterness is strong with this one - likes to come by every 6 months or so to peddle this argument and usually gets just about as far. Why he remains so traumatised by it after all this time is a mystery.

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:41 pm  

tb wrote:

so: starbug's case is that the promotion criteria under which we were promoted in 2005 differ from the ground standards laid out in the Framing the Future document of 199something or thereabouts. And he offers this as evidence that the RFL changed the rules during 2005 just to benefit us?

It's not the sort of evidence that would fly in a court of law, is it?

Also does anyone seriously believe we would have passed up the chance of promotion for want of sticking some seats in the Princess St..... we were hardly in the same position as Whitehaven whose ground virtually required a rebuild. Talk about clutching at straws to convince ones-self and others that Cas are in SL courtesy of rule-bending.

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 1:09 pm  

tb wrote:

See … you could provide more support for your argument if you could be bothered.

So you believe me , without a press release from the RFL ?

Yes it would have been ludicrous for the RFL to refuse you admittance back into SL for the sake of 500 seats that wouldn't get used anyway , just as it would/will be ludicrous if you end up being ' demoted ' out of SL for the same reason , stadium criteria for a sport like RL is just a joke , Wheldon Road is more than adequate to host SL games and to potentially provide cas with enough money to be self sufficient , and by the same yardstick , Hilton Park was more than adequate to do the same for Leigh before we put the extra seats in

Filling the bloody things should be the priority

I'll leave ' Speedy ' to his SHOUTING now , and will never again mention the subject of how the RFL changed their own rules to accomadate Cas;s return to SL , lets face it Mr Lewis stated that Cas were ' a SL club in all bar name ' , didn't he ?

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 2:17 pm  

Starbug wrote:

lets face it Mr Lewis stated that Cas were ' a SL club in all bar name ' , didn't he ?

Wasn't that Richard Wright?

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 2:24 pm  

Gazemous wrote:

Wasn't that Richard Wright?

No , it was Lewis

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 2:41 pm  

Starbug wrote: No , it was Lewis Ahem...Richard Wright in Ponte and Cas "If we do go down, we'll stay a Super League club in all but name."

Starbug wrote: No , it was Lewis Ahem...Richard Wright in Ponte and Cas "If we do go down, we'll stay a Super League club in all but name."

[tb]

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Nov 17, 2010 2:46 pm  

tbf to 'buggy (which isn't easy ) - yes, when licensing was first mooted in 2005, Lewis cited us as an example of a super league level club currently in the National Leagues (which was immediately seized upon by various fans of other clubs as evidence that we were Richard Lewis's lovechild and they'd do anything to get us back into SL. Which is mildly interesting given many of our own fans view of Mr Lewis and the RFL now)