I've taken some time to try and decide whether what Fax has done was a good or a bad thing. I admit that I did question whether it was all that bad when you consider the 'criteria' that was laid out. Are Fax simply playing the system?
However when you consider the fact that their chairman was the one that first mentioned this 2,500 figure some time ago and that they have done next to nothing, it would seem, to increase crowds then I think it is actually not too far off cheating.
There isn't too much of a pretence on the Fax board that the figure announced was way off the actual attendance. Is this then any less of a rule break than a salary cap infringement? I'm beginning to lean towards the side of it being no different.
Clubs break the salary cap to win an unfair advantage and that is what Fax have done. I did expect the same from Leigh but I have to hand it to them that they played fairly and announced that they were short even though the repercussions of that decision could be large.
The justification for this rule break is being given that Fax wanted to stick two fingers up at the RFL. I think the reality is very different from that and they have played right into their hands.
The RFL are now in a position to trumpet about the good crowds in the championship and swat away complaints of a stagnating competition under franchising.. the blame can be placed firmly at the door of Fax for otherwise achieving poor crowds. Next time around the RFL can place the same minimum criteria down under the 'pretence' that Fax have managed to achieve that figure once and so should be able to achieve it on a regular basis if they tried.
Yep... if you ask me Fax have played an absolute blinder
