: Sun Oct 19, 2008 7:54 pm  

Starbug wrote:

So you do work for the RFL after all

no, i just care about the game a huge amount more than these clubs who have all mostly wasted their opportunity and are now trying to stop anyone else having a go

: Sun Oct 19, 2008 8:13 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

no, i just care about the game a huge amount more than these clubs who have all mostly wasted their opportunity and are now trying to stop anyone else having a go

Go on then

Explain how these incompetant shitheap clubs from the northern backwaters are stopping ' somebody else ' from having a go

: Sun Oct 19, 2008 8:45 pm  

Starbug wrote:

Go on then

Explain how these incompetant shitheap clubs from the northern backwaters are stopping ' somebody else ' from having a go

i didnt say they were stopping them, i said they were trying

a prime example would the epic leigh franchise dummy spit

: Sun Oct 19, 2008 9:03 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

i didnt say they were stopping them, i said they were trying

a prime example would the epic leigh franchise dummy spit

When all else fails

Change the subject

Again

: Sun Oct 19, 2008 9:23 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

these northern backwaters,

So I take it you're including Sheffield in there even though it's as big as Toulouse, or Gateshead who represent the large Tyneside area. Both of which are working their way up from being shafted and will be adversely affected by having to travel to France (it's not just money, the players have to take time off work). Yet if they'd kept Toulouse in France and created a European comp for the top teams of both leagues then both leagues would have gained something and been seen as equal, rather than moving French Elite down from being a feeder league to SL to being a feeder league to NL1 for the sake of one club. Toulouse in NL1 is just a short term fix, they should stay French Elite til they're ready for SL

: Sun Oct 19, 2008 9:36 pm  

Starbug wrote:

When all else fails

Change the subject

Again

in what way have i changed the subject? you asked me how they were stopping others having a go, i replied they werent, but they were trying and the epic Leigh dummy spit was a prime example of the kind of thing they were doing

fool

: Sun Oct 19, 2008 9:47 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

in what way have i changed the subject? you asked me how they were stopping others having a go, i replied they werent, but they were trying and the epic Leigh dummy spit was a prime example of the kind of thing they were doing

fool

Go on

Explain were the clubs are trying to stop anybody else ' having a go '

Also explain how Leigh have continued thier complaints [ dummy spit in your terms ] for longer than the first week after the decision [ 3 months ago ] ?

You have tried to change the subject of the argument which was myself and Bowes asking what ' tangible ' benifits the existing NL clubs [ Nl 1 and 2 ] will get from the inclusion of Toulouse in NL 1 from next season

Because there are none you have tried to change the subject

: Sun Oct 19, 2008 9:47 pm  

bowes wrote:

So I take it you're including Sheffield in there even though it's as big as Toulouse, or Gateshead who represent the large Tyneside area. Both of which are working their way up from being shafted and will be adversely affected by having to travel to France (it's not just money, the players have to take time off work)

Toulouse is about twice the size of Sheffield, and sheffields population is about 300k less than the tyneside conurbation,

at what stage did i say all clubs outside SL? both Gateshead and Sheffield seem to have embraced the situation much better than clubs like Leigh and Widnes, and maybe even clubs like Fax, Oldham etc,

as for players needing to take time off work, we are supposed to be trying to improve the image of the NLs as something other than a small time comp between pit villages yet there are complaints that players are having to take a day or two off their part time job to travel to france

Yet if they'd kept Toulouse in France and created a European comp for the top teams of both leagues then both leagues would have gained something and been seen as equal, rather than moving French Elite down from being a feeder league to SL to being a feeder league to NL1 for the sake of one club. Toulouse in NL1 is just a short term fix, they should stay French Elite til they're ready for SL

have there been a lot of sponsors looking to pay for a european comp between two semi-pro leagues, under a much much bigger european competition we already have (super league)?

Could Toulouse put together that squad, invest in the youth as they have, go pro as they have and prepare for SL like they are by adding a couple a games on to the end of the year?

the french elite and the NLs are and will be a feeder league to SL, thats how it is, the best players from each of these two leagues will both move to the SL clubs, the reason Toulouse is in the NLs is to prepare for SL, its to get more money from sponsors, from TV, which they can then invest in to preparing themselves

: Sun Oct 19, 2008 9:55 pm  

Starbug wrote:

Go on

Explain were the clubs are trying to stop anybody else ' having a go '

Also explain how Leigh have continued thier complaints [ dummy spit in your terms ] for longer than the first week after the decision [ 3 months ago ] ?

You have tried to change the subject of the argument which was myself and Bowes asking what ' tangible ' benifits the existing NL clubs [ Nl 1 and 2 ] will get from the inclusion of Toulouse in NL 1 from next season

Because there are none you have tried to change the subject

you might want to look back and see who ignored the relevant part of my post,

i havent changed the subject at all, i have explained to you there may not be any 'tangible' benefit to the existing NL clubs, because the existing NL clubs arent the most important thing in rugby league, everything isnt done with them in mind, and everything isnt done for their benefit, it isnt all about a few clubs in the NLs the game is bigger than them!

and to answer the other part of your post (which somehow isnt changing the subject from the tangible benefits, but is still completely irrelevant to it, hypocrisy thy name is starbug) the Leigh complaints were pathetic, they went to press bad mouthing another club and questioning their right to be where they are

''We are thoroughly disgusted with the Celtic decision,'' Allan Rowley, their chief executive, said. ''The decision-makers should hang their heads in shame.

"We are going to ask the RFL how Celtic ticked more boxes. We owe that to the public of Leigh.''

comments like these seem like a fairly blatant example of Leigh trying to use the media to pressure the RFL into re-examining their position

: Sun Oct 19, 2008 10:46 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

you might want to look back and see who ignored the relevant part of my post,

i havent changed the subject at all, i have explained to you there may not be any 'tangible' benefit to the existing NL clubs, because the existing NL clubs arent the most important thing in rugby league, everything isnt done with them in mind, and everything isnt done for their benefit, it isnt all about a few clubs in the NLs the game is bigger than them!

and to answer the other part of your post (which somehow isnt changing the subject from the tangible benefits, but is still completely irrelevant to it, hypocrisy thy name is starbug) the Leigh complaints were pathetic, they went to press bad mouthing another club and questioning their right to be where they are

''We are thoroughly disgusted with the Celtic decision,'' Allan Rowley, their chief executive, said. ''The decision-makers should hang their heads in shame.
"We are going to ask the RFL how Celtic ticked more boxes. We owe that to the public of Leigh.''

comments like these seem like a fairly blatant example of Leigh trying to use the media to pressure the RFL into re-examining their position

These comments made the day after the decision [ 3 months ago ] as you have highlighted were all aimed at the RFL so how are they bad mouthing another club

Was Mr Wilkinson at Salford bad mouthing the RFL or the Celtic Crusaders when he complained about the ausstralian club that beat them in the NL 1 semi ?

Have you heard any more complaints from the Leigh club either about the franchise decision or the inclusion of Toulouse , if so please provide some proof of it

You seem to be getting confused between a supporter of the club and the club itself

I see you have now refrained from insulting clubs in this post unlike you did earlier

You really do need to calm down a bit , instead of all this constant arguing with anybody that you can find

It is really making you look stupid

I do see that you now concede that there may not be any tangible benifits to the existing NL clubs , which is a change from what you have been posting for quite some time

So you have changed ' tack ' on this

NL clubs fans understand completely that we are not the be all and end all of RL but why should that mean we dont want what is best for our clubs

You state that we will become nothing more than feeder clubs to SL along with the French elite , that may well be true but then in the past you have criticised NL clubs for lacking ambition , so make your mind up we either should have ambition to better ourselves and as you have stated many times we are a business in a competitive industry [ both with our fellow clubs and with SL clubs and other sports ] and therefore we are fighting for the best deal we can get or should we all meakly get shafted by all and sundry for the good of the game

You seem to be of the opinion that we should get nothing from ' central ' funds unless we are happy to oblige the RFL , well that is your opinion and you are entitled to it

We are the least important part of the sport in your opinion and would be the least missed if we were to leave the control of the RFL

That might one day happen and in my opinion it would not put us in any worse a position than we will be in the next few years

In the mean time if I think the RFL are making a mistake I will say so