: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:49 pm  

Wellsy13 wrote:

Sorry, I had no intention of bringing up a bad part of your history to embarrass you!

Thanks. I feel better now.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:51 pm  

Wellsy13 wrote:

I aren't trying to twist anything. You're trying to bring up a completely hypothetical argument that you cannot prove right or wrong, so no matter what I reply you will still disagree with. What's the point?

If Wigan, Saints or anyone in the SL didn't meet ANY criteria to be in SL, then I guarantee that they would not be in the SL. Anyone that is trying to argue that they would despite not meeting ANY criteria is simply idiotic.

like the awarding of franchises

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:51 pm  

Durham Giant wrote:

Yes. for the benefit of RL.

those who only care about their own teams or are too stupid to understand what is at stake are voting no.

Edited for accuracy.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:52 pm  

Starbug wrote:

On or Off pitch , and who makes that decision ?

Presumably going by the criteria and the decisional will be made by the licence panel.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:53 pm  

classycas2009 wrote:

If your ansrew is no...then this is just not the way forward....if you answer yes...I think you lieing to yourself

If they would then yes...maybe this is the way forward, but in a realistic world of RFL thats not going to happen is it?

If you think a club can be in SL and not achieve ANY of the criteria, you are deluding yourself.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:54 pm  

Wellsy13 wrote:

I aren't trying to twist anything. You're trying to bring up a completely hypothetical argument that you cannot prove right or wrong, so no matter what I reply you will still disagree with. What's the point?

If Wigan, Saints or anyone in the SL didn't meet ANY criteria to be in SL, then I guarantee that they would not be in the SL. Anyone that is trying to argue that they would despite not meeting ANY criteria is simply idiotic.

i dont mean if they dont meet ANY

lets just say halifax meet more critia points than Quinns/Wigan etc...would RFL swap them places

Top goes up, bottom goes down....theres no arguments then....make NRL1 more competitve and if your sat at bottom of SL, you need to bck your ideas up or your going down.

Lets not have some people in suits making up ideas of why a team should be there and who shouldnt

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:55 pm  

Red Red Robin wrote:

Presumably going by the criteria and the decisional will be made by the licence panel.

Which is nothing more than somebodies opinion , and therefore no more relative than yours or mine

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:57 pm  

bluesox4evaaa wrote:

going with a womans argument on this issue would be more dangerous than allowing a monkey to fly a plane

One, I'm a bloke.

Two, you are an ignoramous.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:57 pm  

Starbug wrote:

Which is nothing more than somebodies opinion , and therefore no more relative than yours or mine

well...... SPOT ON CHAP

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:02 pm  

classycas2009 wrote:

i dont mean if they dont meet ANY

lets just say halifax meet more critia points than Quinns/Wigan etc...would RFL swap them places

Top goes up, bottom goes down....theres no arguments then....make NRL1 more competitve and if your sat at bottom of SL, you need to bck your ideas up or your going down.

Lets not have some people in suits making up ideas of why a team should be there and who shouldnt

No, they wouldn't swap them, because that's not how the process works.

You really need to understand the licensing process more before trying to argue against it.