Re: Come on you Mutants : Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:05 pm  

Pepe wrote:

So, Leigh did actually reach the income levels required but, because they forgot to include stadium income, which the club is perfectly entitled to include, the RFL docked them points?

Yeah, alright

They didn't even give Leigh the chance to re-submit the figures with the stadium income included?

WOW! The RFL really hate leigh, don't they?


I suppose that excuse would allow the RFL to get away with only imposing a 3 point deduction and no fine - if all this is true, of course. I guess we’d need to get that accountant, which you’d like to go through Widnes’ books, to also take a look at Leigh’s books too?

In the meantime, we can all just do what you do, and make any accusation we want to, without a shred of evidence either way. We’ll all just go by gut feeling and what we want to think looks obvious.

Believe what you want , not too sure but we could have challenged it and it might have resulted in points and a fine , given our record on legal challenges , it was thought prudent to ' shut up and take the points ' rather than to risk a financial penalty , and looking at how the league table will end , that looks like being the correct decision

Re: Come on you Mutants : Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:07 pm  

J20 wrote:

So you did lie anyway as you didn't include these figures but anticipated levels of income still wrong! Saying oh but we could have included these is irrelevant as you weren't doing so and still submitted false predictions.

The prediction only became ' false ' when we incorrectly submitted the accounts , if we had submitted the % of stadium income correctly , the prediction would have been correct

Either way , we ' cocked up ' and have suffered for it , thats life

Re: Come on you Mutants : Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:15 pm  

LeythIg wrote:

Nearest scenario with an ineligible player that I can remember is when there was the Hull farce. It was a mess because they'd actually played in the next round of the competition before being found out, so kicking them out of the competition left the dilemma of who took their place. I reckon if they'd been found out earlier, there would've been a real danger of them being kicked out of the cup.

Can't think of any league games where a team has been found to have an ineligible player (though my memory is worth precisely zero, i can barely remember what i did yesterday!). But i know other sports have had teams docked any points they gained whilst fielding an ineligible player.

So, there's nothing there which points to me being wrong in what I'm saying?

Re: Come on you Mutants : Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:16 pm  

Starbug wrote:

The prediction only became ' false ' when we incorrectly submitted the accounts , if we had submitted the % of stadium income correctly , the prediction would have been correct

Either way , we ' cocked up ' and have suffered for it , thats life

You see, the unwillingness to put in an appeal just makes Leigh look even more guilty. If it really was a simple ‘clerical error’, and just a matter of re-submitting the accounts, which include income from the LSV, then Leigh could have avoided losing these vital 3 points quite easily.

The fact that they chose not to, casts serious doubt on the simple ‘clerical error’ excuse.

Re: Come on you Mutants : Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:21 pm  

Pepe wrote:

You see, the unwillingness to put in an appeal just makes Leigh look even more guilty. If it really was a simple ‘clerical error’, and just a matter of re-submitting the accounts, which include income from the LSV, then Leigh could have avoided losing these vital 3 points quite easily.

The fact that they chose not to, casts serious doubt on the simple ‘clerical error’ excuse.

Believe what you want , whatever I say wont change your opinion that we ' cheated ' , ATEOTD it hasn't affected our league position , unless your lot can muster a SL type performance on sunday , and as most of them will be playing their next to last game in a Widnes shirt , I wont be holding my breath

Re: Come on you Mutants : Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:33 pm  

I don't see why the Lobby's hate the RFL so much, that's twice in less than 3 years they've saved their bacon now!

Re: Come on you Mutants : Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:37 pm  

Pepe wrote:

So, there's nothing there which points to me being wrong in what I'm saying?

No, I just said that there would be a good chance that you would get docked points for fielding an ineligible player, if you picked up points in that match.

I then suggested that you might have been on your high horse.

I stand by both comments

I want to stop this conversation now, just because it always takes me numerous attempts to spell the word 'ineligible' (I'm still not convinced that's spelt correctly!)

Re: Come on you Mutants : Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:38 pm  

J20 wrote:

I don't see why the Lobby's hate the RFL so much, that's twice in less than 3 years they've saved their bacon now!

Good work. Is there a fishing smiley on this thing?

Re: Come on you Mutants : Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:46 pm  

J20 wrote:

I don't see why the Lobby's hate the RFL so much, that's twice in less than 3 years they've saved their bacon now!

Yes that 3 point deduction really saved us ! , from what exactly ?

Re: Come on you Mutants : Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:46 pm  

LeythIg wrote:

No, I just said that there would be a good chance that you would get docked points for fielding an ineligible player, if you picked up points in that match.

I then suggested that you might have been on your high horse.

I stand by both comments

I want to stop this conversation now, just because it always takes me numerous attempts to spell the word 'ineligible' (I'm still not convinced that's spelt correctly!)

I did try to get on my 'high horse' but I couldn't get Starbug and his missus off it.