[tb]

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Dec 01, 2010 3:14 pm  

Yes. I know the meaning of the phrase. How does it apply to the Crusaders agreeing with the RFL that they will pay the debts they owe to the RFL?

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Dec 01, 2010 3:38 pm  

Intresting. http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sports/rug ... nts-bottom There is also a sizeable amount of money at stake as Sky TV are believed to be increasing payments to Super League clubs to £3m. But that is on condition that the clubs in London (Harlequins), France (Catalans Dragons) and Wales (Crusaders) remain in Super League

Intresting. http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sports/rug ... nts-bottom There is also a sizeable amount of money at stake as Sky TV are believed to be increasing payments to Super League clubs to £3m. But that is on condition that the clubs in London (Harlequins), France (Catalans Dragons) and Wales (Crusaders) remain in Super League

[tb]

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:02 pm  

poppys mum wrote: Intresting. http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sports/rug ... nts-bottom There is also a sizeable amount of money at stake as Sky TV are believed to be increasing payments to Super League clubs to £3m. But that is on condition that the clubs in London (Harlequins), France (Catalans Dragons) and Wales (Crusaders) remain in Super League Frankly, imo, that's total sphericals down to bad journalism. See discussion here

poppys mum wrote: Intresting. http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sports/rug ... nts-bottom There is also a sizeable amount of money at stake as Sky TV are believed to be increasing payments to Super League clubs to £3m. But that is on condition that the clubs in London (Harlequins), France (Catalans Dragons) and Wales (Crusaders) remain in Super League Frankly, imo, that's total sphericals down to bad journalism. See discussion here

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:41 pm  

tb wrote:

Yes. I know the meaning of the phrase. How does it apply to the Crusaders agreeing with the RFL that they will pay the debts they owe to the RFL?

It does, because they haven't, they have agreed a reduced figure, bail out!!

[tb]

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:42 pm  

source?

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:58 pm  

Good lord what have I done!! The "bail out" reference was to do with the RFL giving assistance to the Crusaders prior to the move to their new home for which they now owe the RFL money which is part of the story is it not?
If the term is inapropriate or the RFL have not helped the Crusaders then I apologise but the phrase "bail out" is the first thing that comes to mind when a governing body such as the RFL give such assistance to a club in order to safeguard its future.
Again if I am mistaken I am sorry.

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:20 pm  

It was an entirely reasonable turn of phrase. The RFL have been helping the Crusaders with their financial and administrative problems and as I understand it have forwarded them some money early in order to help them (or 'bail them') out to ensure the players are paid for November.
I think tb talks a lot of sense most of the time but on occasions he is too quick to play devil's advocate.

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:41 pm  

Roverswall wrote:

Not really but then again I would have linked directly to the RFL site I wouldn't have linked to another site just so more folks could read my words.
I guess i'm just like that I suppose.

No, you would have linked to a photograph of the new shirt design before the official club launch

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Dec 01, 2010 5:48 pm  

tb wrote:

What bail out?

The RFL are a major creditor (£700,000 ?)

The RFL are allowing Crusaders/ Welsh Crusaders to carry on.

If the RFL are paid back £700,000 - No Bail Out

If the RFL are paid back anything less - Bail Out

I know which I think will turn out to be the case!

Re: Crusaders Demise? : Wed Dec 01, 2010 8:07 pm  

Aldy wrote:

No, you would have linked to a photograph of the new shirt design before the official club launch

Would that be the photograph that was already outed?
Thought so