Seemingly a case to answer!! : Thu Jul 27, 2017 7:12 am
Report on Total RL website confirming That the tribunal against the old company, Cha-Lo company and RFL will go ahead in Jan, after RFL failed to get majority of cases thrown out.
http://www.totalrl.com/rfl-appeal-dismi ... -tribunal/ Wonder what the current regime think about current players being involved and what harm (if any) it does to us offering Chisholm a contract next season, fitness permitting. Still think Cha-Lo have nothing to be concerned about, they were told the old club was dead, so bid for a new franchise against a set of criteria from the RFL which did not include settling legacy payments and contracts. Perhaps if the case is lost but Cha-Lo are found to have no liability for above reasons we'll get another penalty plus hold back of funding from the RFL to pay for it, as we are the FFL's pets!! |
Report on Total RL website confirming That the tribunal against the old company, Cha-Lo company and RFL will go ahead in Jan, after RFL failed to get majority of cases thrown out.
http://www.totalrl.com/rfl-appeal-dismi ... -tribunal/ Wonder what the current regime think about current players being involved and what harm (if any) it does to us offering Chisholm a contract next season, fitness permitting. Still think Cha-Lo have nothing to be concerned about, they were told the old club was dead, so bid for a new franchise against a set of criteria from the RFL which did not include settling legacy payments and contracts. Perhaps if the case is lost but Cha-Lo are found to have no liability for above reasons we'll get another penalty plus hold back of funding from the RFL to pay for it, as we are the FFL's pets!! |
|