RLFANS.COM - The World's Most Popular Rugby League Website

Quote: Gotcha "So therefore why did they spit their dummies out?

Shows a complete lack of professionalism then that they would rather cry off than discuss something, when according to you they could'nt have lost anyway.'"

Maybe because they wanted to stick by the original agreement?
As for lack of professionalism, why don't you aim that at the RFL for bringing up the subject contrary to pervious agreements when 2 of the clubs weren't even there? (PS, why no stick for those 2 clubs for not sending someone? Although I have some sympathy if it was hastily arranged and the subject wasn't even on the agenda). They probably thought the items for discussion were the new Sponsorship offers the RFL had sought out? With that in mind it was probably fair that they thought not going wouldn't mean they missed much.

Quote: Gotcha "Just pinched this off TotalRL. Sounds more and more like some kind of unsophisticated pseudo-Mafia is attempting to run the RFL if this is the pathetic approach they bring to issues as enormously important as this.

[i"Pearson said that the meeting was called at short notice and the clubs weren't expecting the restructure to be on the agenda as all had agreed it should be delayed until after the WC. McManus was away, the Castleford CEO was 'very ill', Bradford had no vote as the new owners haven't been ratified yet, and it was clear that Heatherington had the Leeds, Wakey, and Widnes votes in his pocket.

It was a dead-set ambush attempt and the 6 who walked out were having no part of it. Kath Hetherington appears to have been representing Wakey in some way, although it's not clear how. James Rule, a very close friend and confidant of the above 2 was representing Widnes. And in case you missed it, Pearson wasn't alone with his concerns. There were 6 clubs who felt they were being set up.

Even if you want to dismiss these concerns as paranoia it seems inappropriate at best to spring a vote on such an important issue at a meeting where it wasn't on the circulated agenda and 3 clubs (Saints, Bradford, Castleford) weren't in a position to to make a decisive vote - one not being able to vote at all."[/i

Do Hetherington and Wood seriously think they are going to either bully or con (or both) 6 of the most influential clubs in the game by methods like these? Looks like they tried, had their bluff called and were found badly wanting. What a pair of numbskulls.'"

Sounds about right for the current RFL board to me.