www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=15082 RFL statement on Celtic Crusaders

www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=15082 RFL statement on Celtic Crusaders

Yep, the RFL get out 'clause' I was expecting -

The RFL would like to point out that the awarding of visas is an issue between players and the UK Border Agency, not the RFL. For clarification, the governing body would not refuse a player’s registration if the UK Border Agency approved a player’s status and the appropriate documentation was provided.

Yes by cheating and playing players on a incorrect visa they played for an entire two seasons with unqualified players, I hope they turn it round and go bust for the injustice suffered by Halifax, Widnes, Featherstone.

Worst business decision I have ever seen by any organisation thats runs on a full time basis.

Why do people seem to think that Widnes had a god given right to be in SL. They had a number of financial problems over the last couple of years, and didn't even finish in the top 2 last year.

I don't think they had a god given right but the RFL contradicted itself in this case.
When asked about celtics poor crowds,stability of the club etc when compared to widnes they said that was a past issue and they wouldn't be judged on it.
Then they said a factor in rejecting widnes was because of financial mis-management in the past which had nothing to do with the new owner,who also pledged to put the money needed to run the club into a seperate account that the RFL could monitor.
The warnings were there re-celtic but the RFL ignored them under the "expansion" banner.
I think the financial problems,squad, and lack of support have shown this venture thus far to be a failure and imo it should be between widnes,halifax and leigh who replaces them.

It's not like you to knee jerk

You might want to do some research into the well documented financial difficulties each of those clubs has endured in the very recent past before trumpeting them as replacements.

Back on the issue - it would appear that the Crusaders had the required paperwork to enable the players to work in the UK and register with the RFL when they first signed their contracts. That the UK Border Agency have decided to make yet another change to their entry/working criteria subsequently isn't something that the RFL should carry the can for. It doesn't exist as an organisation to hold the hands of its member clubs and ensure they comply with every piece of UK employment legislation on the statute books.

As an employer, the Crusaders have a responsibility to ensure anyone they employ meets the criteria to work in the UK throughout their employment. They've clearly dropped the ball on this one and I would be surprised if the Border Agency don't seek to impose further financial penalties on them.

On the other hand I'd suggest that it SHOULD be a function of a sports governing body to at the very least advise member clubs of legal requirements and changes to those requirements.

I was a director of a company for many years and like many other directors had my hands full enough with the day to day running of that business without also subscribing to Hansard or purchasing every White Paper ever published in order to keep up with legislation and yet if I put a foot wrong there would be a civil servant only too willing to point out that ignorance is no excuse - government expect you to be as interested in their work as they clearly are



In order to be advised on such issues I subscribed to the Fed of Small Businesses and if anyone wonders just how many changes to legislation occur during the course of a parliament then you should take a look at the monthly FSB newsletter and their many pages of articles.

Too much legislation and red tape for small business you say?

The pub sector voiced complaints about this.

Not to worry. Here's the governments solution.

"one of the main reasons behind the instigation of the Local Better Regulation Office (LBRO).........While the LBRO has been established as a company limited by guarantee it will be given statutory powers by the Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Bill. It is hoped that it will be fully functional by 2009"

So, to help small business cope with the burden of implement and complying with a flood of legislation they instigate a new legislative body and an accompanying piece of legislation to empower it.





[url=http://www.betterregulation.gov.uk/ideas/viewidea.cfm?proposalid=583c8eea9d5946ada66a71adc2397517Linky.[/url

<boring>
Because of the Watergate scandal, which was so called because the building where the break-in which brought to light Mr Nixon's naughtiness occurred was called The Watergate Complex. You no doubt knew this, but I thought our younger readers might like a history lesson.
</boring>

And elsewhere "Chickmightbeadudegate" at the World Championships.

I've just had my garden gates put up.

Just for Danny, pictures to follow.