Don't recall saying they were? But they have been in talks with them for the past few weeks. And is this at best another new rule based on administration & points deductions then?

It is?

What was previous rule then?

You ever seen this mentioned before? A majority of clubs have paid off a % of debt to exit administration (otherwise would go to liquidation?) yet never mention of this part of the rulings before?

So that's a "it existed in my head then"? OK.

so its always been rfl policy to reduce the number of point deducted from any team thats goes bust as long as that club says it will pay some of the debt off ?.

I said it never did exist! No point checking RFL rules anyway as they change by the minute!

Er. No. You stated that the rule had changed: Therefore, logically, that some other rule had previously existed.

Right. So "I said it never did exist!" was a mistruth. How do you seriously expect to argue whatever point you have when you don't even know what you're saying?

But all you've done is take us back to rlhererl and the unanswered question of what this previous rule was.

What are you banging on about? I said the rule stating points deduction was relevant to debt paid didn't exist, not the rule on administration / deduction as a whole. Maybe you need a lie down?

They've stated it through a RL paper, was you expecting a personal e mail

VAT is going up to 20% i believe, you wont be surprised to find out that i read that somewhere too as opposed to receiving a letter from the PM

Not a place i frequent, who knows

I'd hazard a guess i wouldnt have done the day the decision was made, probably more so the days after it being decided

Wouldn't that be the chancellor of the exchequers job?

There's no rule on stating points deduction is relative to debt paid. There is and always has been a rule stating that the punishment for going into administration is a points deduction of up to a maximum. Taking account of mitigating circumstances, whatever they were, has always been part of implementing the rule. There has never been a rule stating that the maximum points deduction is the also the minimum, nor that it is mandatory.

So, in response to your claim that there's been a rule change, based - [ike so much else you've posted on these thread – on 'facts' that only exist inside your own head:

"What are you banging on about?"



Honest. If I were you, I'd give it a rest. You're not only making yourself look a fool, but severely undermining any case that might exist to criticise either the Crusaders or the RFL.