with only one hand on it

fine the club has made a mistake which could be classed as cheating however what needs qustioning is why it took it to be posted on a fans forum and 3 hours before the game for the RFL to intervine when its nearly a month after the game when the incident for the RFL to realise surely they too sholuld have checks in place????

perhaps they should have better checks in place, but how does this change things?

WE HAVE PHUCK'D UP END OF.

i know what your saying daz, both the rfl and fax are at fault here. on one hand the rfl are a bit of a non-plus, esp if it takes a messageboard post to brig it to their attention of an offence that may/not been have commited (i say may/not as i'm looking as an outsider) and why it's taken so long. on the otherhand though how are the rfl supposed to know that you were gonna pick ostick? that part of the puzzle lays fair and square at the admisistrators of the club or whoever deals with contracts/registrations etc etc.

one way to avoid this sort of thing happening would be something like this. the rfl has a list of your playing squad (and surely to god they keep records of who was signed on and when) and they can then inform you of who is available and who is not - either due to registration dates or suspensions etc. i'm sure i remember something in the past or may have imagined that teams had to submit teams 24/48 hrs before a game and they then couldn't be changed unless somethig like a) player was unavailable or b) a proved injury. if that did happen why is it not used now?


i know it doen't help but someone has dropped an almighty bollack and needs shooting

Its alright saying get rid of this person and that person. We have already lost two members of the board and can ill forward to lose anymore. It's better to have a board than none at all. Who will take over????????? We have to be very careful.


As for the coach - I think it's time for his good times to end -as soon as we can find a replacement. How can he not have known ostick had already played - I'm certain i read it somewhere when he signed for us.

The arrogance and inability to organise a p*** up in a brewery is extremely embarassing

Im pretty sure those that voted 'yes' must be wind up merchant fans of other teams.
All we ask of is professionalism. It is a very important word for any club looking to move forward

Am willing to wait and give the club and officials the benefit of doubt until a final judgement is made from the RFL. Innocent; then get prepared for lots of aplogies. Guilty; well that becomes a dark day.

At last, someone else with some common sense.

Even if we were 'innocent' there should never have been the issue in the first place. Look at the CC rules as stated- if someone had bothered to read them and then check if our one midseason signing had played previously in it this season, theres no way hed have been in the team at Swinton.

If we are innocent then surely that is nothing that the club have done wrong and that is an issue for the RFL to sort out and for you lot to vent your frustration at although we all know that is a futile past time.

I paraphrased the word. Innocent would not be the correct word if we were let off, because frankly rules are rules, and us being declared 'innocent' would be hard to justify

Why flea?

I remember this, (and have posted something about this elsewhere), from back in Fax's SL days I think it was. Wasn't it brought in when Millward fielded a practical Saints 2nd team in a crucial league game the week before the CC final claiming that all those players he omitted were injured? I wasn't aware that this rule had been rescinded.