Don't read 'em then, scroll past.

So Castleford pulling Mitch Clark out of 'our' team hours before a game isn't DP interfering in our team plans and telling us who we can and can't play?

In fairness, that's a very different kettle of fish to your previous suggestion that [i"the SL club tell the 'partner' club who and when will play for said partner club".[/i

Clearly you don’t understand how the partnership works.

Both clubs know any offered player can be withdrawn at anytime and have appropriate back up plans.

Just like you would do if someone fell ill at the last minute or got injured in the warm up Fax simply brought in the 18th player who would have been involved in the pre match training and build up process precisely to cause the minimum disruption.

That is exactly what RM said at the time, that he would have liked a bit more size and grunt but it did not interfere with game plans or affect the result.

To say the SL club are some sort of dictatorship that Fax have to bow down to

The level of misrepresentation of our own club is embarrassing to be honest.

Well Castleford certainly told us that Clark wasn't going to play for us in that particular game.

Really.

To say 1 player of Mitch’s standard who had never trained or played for Fax before and can’t be d according to you if he did play could be so badly missed and have such a negative impact especially when you say we only get their cast offs.

Now that does beggar belief.

I'm concerned now. My son's playing junior football this weekend.

If I have to pull him out on the morning of the game, because of illness or another reason, do you think the other parents will believe that I am dictating who and when will play for the club?

Another thought.
Mitch is a prop who at best would be on the pitch for say a couple of spells totalling 30 to 40 mins.
The game plan as far as he was concerned would be.
Drive it in hard and tackle hard and get on top of your opposite number.
It’s not like he would be involved in dictating plays or anything.

No problems with the other parents but Hudds will probably never watch them play again.

Lol!

In fairness he's been consistent throughout about DR. There are plenty of people in forumland who have spoken out against DR and then changed their tune to "our use is different because..." when their own team has started using it.

I just think he's wrong about the terms of DR arrangements always only suiting the "senior" partners in the arrangement.

Well it definitely suited Fev last season but one of my main points about DR isn't just about the now, it's about the bigger picture. Fax and Fev may be able to see out these ridiculous 'partnerships' but some of the smaller clubs will, I fear, go to the wall and that would be a great shame. The game needs to ask itself what the future is and I would rather it involve the likes of Oldham and York, not Ottawa and New York.

No! The game including supporters needs to ask if it wants a future full stop. And if that means it needs us to expand to New York and ottawa to hopefully attract new interest, exposure and new revenue then we need to do it. These small clubs including our own are clearly not doing very much to keep the game alive. In the supposed hotbeds of rugby league we are attracting fewer people to watch the game and people preparing to invest in it.