Not actually playing but an interesting article on the BBC Sports RL page. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/38637113 THe RFL come in for some criticism not least in a passage that says that if a club is in financial trouble it does not seem logical to take away TV finance which is 60% of the income stream. Have a read. See what you think.

Not actually playing but an interesting article on the BBC Sports RL page. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/38637113 THe RFL come in for some criticism not least in a passage that says that if a club is in financial trouble it does not seem logical to take away TV finance which is 60% of the income stream. Have a read. See what you think.

This is an excellent critique on the Love Rugby League website: www.loverugbyleague.com/news_246 ... -sand.html

This is an excellent critique on the Love Rugby League website: www.loverugbyleague.com/news_246 ... -sand.html

Thanks for starting this, I just read the article and was thinking of starting a thread.

Once again we have people who make it their business to study sports management to a high level seeing what the RFL patently refuse to see - namely, that if you punish the sons for the sins of their fathers you simply perpetuate the problem.

This is now the third time that a new owner of the club has been punished for what the previous owners did. It didn't work the first two times did it? And so they go and do it all over again. Rinse and repeat. And the result is a downward spiral - in our case, relegation to the third tier (where most of us wanted to be this season anyway).

The argument that punishing new owners is a 'deterrent', which appears to be the only argument trotted out by the RFL, patently and evidently does NOT work. Otherwise the 6 point 'deterrent' handed out to Marc Green would have convinced him to run the club on sound financial lines. The reports coming out today in the T&A about the scale of debt could not show more clearly that this didn't happen. Yet the RFL immediately whacked the next new owner with an even bigger 12 point penalty!

As the article clearly points out, the RFL haven't got a clue. And with the top clubs largely dependant on benefactors, it is only a matter of time before one of them disappears leaving another club in the same morass as us

It is a good article and nails the point on why it's so counterproductive to punish a club for going out of business by taking away the funding from the new owners.

I've yet to hear a coherent rationale on why this approach is taken.

You can see that a picture is starting to come together of why it all went wrong,
They were spending massive amounts in the playing department like Gaskell reportedly been on £80k a year and not playing
A squad of 40+ that couldn't be motivated to beat Batley on a spend of £350k,

Rohan and Jimmy will of been on big wages but imho couldn't get them going in the right direction.
Odsal will of been a contributor as well but a rule in life not just business is its hard earned and easy spent.

I don't think Lowe and Chalmers will throw endless amounts at players but from what was seen on Sunday, it was one of the most motivated performances in years, Bring in Toovey to give that sense of direction to the effort a few more tough want to play and achieve players and we will do better than the last two years by a country mile.

I agree with the above that a pointes deduction, or financial penalty to a club that was or is struggling doesn't make sense.
But I cant think of how they would deter it happening in the future.
what we re facing at the moment as a penalty from the RFL is all kinds of stupid and just makes them look inept at what they do.

It's back to the old 'Admiral Byng' syndrome, isn't it? "Pour encourager les autres'.

As pointed out above, and so so many other times on here and elsewewhere, it just doesn't work, and even worse it just makes the next fall all the more inevitable.

Maybe we should have a whip round and buy the RFL a little gift for all their 'help'?

Does the RFL operate in the 18th century?

Maybe it just seems like it?

Well, a good starting point might be to[i not do something[/i which is totally counterproductive and is only going to make the situation worse. If they could just agree on that, then they may be able to come up with something which actually benefits the club in difficulties. At this point, of course, it's now traditional to make the usual warnings about holding one's breath..

It's like sending you to prison for something I did.

Knowing that you are going down for it does not really work as a deterrent for me....

IN effect you can't learn from the previous owners mistakes because the new owner is continuously put in a worse position to start off. I know it's stating the b******g obvious but if Hood couldn't manage with big crowds and full money, then Khan wouldn't be able to make it work with smaller crowds and half the money, Greene couldn't then manage with even less money and a 6 point deduction. Should we run a poll on whether C&L will make a success of lowest possible CH funding and a 12 point deduction?

They may not, bcause the biggest penalty by far has been dumping us like lambs to be slaughtered in the Championship.

However in financial terms you could speculate that the RFL have learnt some lessons, even if ones they would be shy to admit in public, since if we are rent free for 3 years, and they are paying ground maintenance, and they have paid the HMRC deposit, don't you agree that maybe considerably outweighs the public financial "penalty"?

Is this true, or just you trying to wind up Halifax fans?