Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue May 09, 2017 8:12 am  

Nothus wrote:

We never should have signed Pryce.

I think at the time it was the right thing to do, we had a very capable squad in place so Leon could have rolled out for the important fixtures where we lacked any organisation whatsoever or big game smarts to hopefully get in the top 4 (which I think we would have challenged top spot too) and have a good dig at promotion. At the point of scraping a squad together I agree with you as he is needed on the pitch and i'm sure he will be our highest paid player, and we can't afford that to be sat in the stands when his body starts giving up any more

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue May 09, 2017 8:19 am  

vbfg wrote:

Sounds perfect. Sign him up and announce it.

Wrong way round. I thought we actually announce the signing first, then attempt to sign them up!

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue May 09, 2017 8:38 am  

daveyz999 wrote:

Wrong way round. I thought we actually announce the signing first, then attempt to sign them up!

After making sure he is definitely still contracted to Warrington first.

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue May 09, 2017 9:07 am  

ifallwerelikemumby wrote:

Sorry I never said there is no forward in the world available. Thought you were the pedantic who pointed the wrong assumptions in statements out to other forum users.

Look, I'm fecked off about the way Cha-Lo have managed to turn a promising and unlikely season from triumph to looming disaster, not petty point scoring. The point is, competent and suitably financed management would have covered th hole in the pack one way or the other. We're only punters on a random forum but we all saw the train coming. Our management have dismally failed to fill the holes, and as a result, our brilliant youngsters have started getting creamed, as most of us knew, and said, they would, and we are running out of games to save ourselves, when we could have been almost safe by now. And still no pack good enough to be the 12th leas bad pack in the Championship.

So that's what I'm desperately worried about, not yah boo sucks.

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue May 09, 2017 9:08 am  

Block5Bull wrote:

I apologise. I worded this very badly on the way rushing out to work this morning. Sorry.

Cheers for that. Sorry I was a bit terse with my reply, but it's clear we're on the same side.

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue May 09, 2017 9:15 am  

Uptonfax wrote:

If ground criteria is to be met this time how will Odsal pass......its a hole a large brown one

In your fevered imagination, I expect it is. In reality, it has perfectly well maintained step terracing for ten thousand people with passed and compliant safety barriers and systems, a stand that holds over 5,000, and a large and modern hospitality building at one end.

The only thing it doesn't have is any roof over the terracing, but apart from that, which isn't a requirement, it ticks every box and would pass any RL assessment. As you know, because the truth is, you're just jealous of the iconic Odsal

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue May 09, 2017 11:10 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Cheers for that. Sorry I was a bit terse with my reply, but it's clear we're on the same side.

I had to double take that

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue May 09, 2017 12:18 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

In your fevered imagination, I expect it is. In reality, it has perfectly well maintained step terracing for ten thousand people with passed and compliant safety barriers and systems, a stand that holds over 5,000, and a large and modern hospitality building at one end.

The only thing it doesn't have is any roof over the terracing, but apart from that, which isn't a requirement, it ticks every box and would pass any RL assessment. As you know, because the truth is, you're just jealous of the iconic Odsal

It would be hard for the RFL to fail their own stadium.(But not beyond the realms of possibility).

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Wed May 10, 2017 5:49 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

In your fevered imagination, I expect it is. In reality, it has perfectly well maintained step terracing for ten thousand people with passed and compliant safety barriers and systems, a stand that holds over 5,000, and a large and modern hospitality building at one end.

The only thing it doesn't have is any roof over the terracing, but apart from that, which isn't a requirement, it ticks every box and would pass any RL assessment. As you know, because the truth is, you're just jealous of the iconic Odsal

Tell you what I don't think Toronto or Toulouse' grounds meet criteria.

Don't tell big Nigel though.

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Wed May 10, 2017 7:03 am  

I've hear Big Nige's only realy criteria is the calorific value of the nose-bag he gets served up after the game. 5000 calories topped off with treacle sponge and custard and it's criteria met.

But also seriously, I was told (yes I know I hate that phrase too) by a person involved in a previous admin/bidding that the RFL told Cha-low long before Christmas that they would have to wait and play the long game before getting their paws on the club. And this was before Cha-low were announced.

I can only pray that there is a plan with this because I don't think I can stomach dropping down another league and losing all the kids we have. That would be one kick in the balls too many for me and I'd be cashing in my chips.