| FORUMS > The Virtual Terrace > Crusaders to start on -4 points |
 |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 153 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Apr 2010 | 15 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jul 2015 | Jul 2015 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Gahan "They've stated it through a RL paper, was you expecting a personal e mail ![]()
It shouldn't be too much to ask for the game's ruling body to publish such decisions and a brief explanation on their official website, but apparently it is.
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Owner | 2874 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2004 | 21 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Aug 2024 | Aug 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Gahan "
According to the LE, the Crusaders have agreed to pay a substantial amount of their debt, that's why they've only been deducted 4 points.
'"
Legally, the management of Crusaders could not agree to do that.
When a company goes into administration all control of the business is relinquished to the administrator, and only he has the power to decide who gets paid and in what ratio based on the sale price of the assets less the costs of administration. The debts of the old company can not be transferred to the new company either, unless the business is sold as a 'going concern' which in this case it wasn't. |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Owner | 33944 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Mar 2004 | 21 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Mar 2016 | Mar 2016 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Gahan "Seek and you shall find
According to the LE, the Crusaders have agreed to pay a substantial amount of their debt, that's why they've only been deducted 4 points.
The 9 point deductions are when clubs write off all or most of the debt.
Or words similar to that but you get the drift'"
If that is the case then that is excellent news , hopefully we wont be in this situation again |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Board Member | 2448 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Nov 2002 | 22 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Dec 2020 | Sep 2020 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: ExiledTiger "It shouldn't be too much to ask for the game's ruling body to publish such decisions and a brief explanation on their official website, but apparently it is.'"
I thank you - clearly not every poster here is a dyed in the wool apologist for the RFL. After all, don't they go into a lot of detail on their site to explain the penalty for player disciplinary?
For example, looking back through the archives:
Sean Long was given a 150 pound fine and banned for the second half of the game after next. His arm only made brief but intentional contact with the 30 longest hairs on the left eyebrow of Lee Briers. In the context of his previously disciplinary record and the fact we think he is a complete to$$er, we feel a significant deterrent is appropriate for this class 2 grade 3 offence.
Yet they cannot bring themselves to be transparent about a much more serious threat to the credibility of the sport! |
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Coach | 7911 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jan 2005 | 20 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Nov 2012 | Aug 2012 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Quote: ExiledTiger "It shouldn't be too much to ask for the game's ruling body to publish such decisions and a brief explanation on their official website, but apparently it is.'"
Been on 4 days
www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/20669 |
|
Quote: ExiledTiger "It shouldn't be too much to ask for the game's ruling body to publish such decisions and a brief explanation on their official website, but apparently it is.'"
Been on 4 days
www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/20669 | |
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 6096 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Apr 2009 | 16 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jun 2015 | Oct 2014 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Gahan "Been on 4 days
I think he meant explaining why they didn't go for the standard 6 (3 wins). Remember the RFL are a governing body and are answerable to stake holders in our sport... They are not an independent body who can do what they like without question which some seem happy to allow as long as they are fine.
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 9078 |  |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Mar 2006 | 19 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Nov 2024 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Surely the RFL should give them a four point head start for groundbreaking work in the field of reducing club debt?
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 4799 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Mar 2002 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jun 2021 | Apr 2019 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Clearwing "Surely the RFL should give them a four point head start for groundbreaking work in the field of reducing club debt?[/quo 
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 280 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jun 2009 | 15 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Nov 2016 | Aug 2011 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| I'm just poking at possible answers here. But I believe the RFL have been a little more lienient on the crusaders for two reasons.
1. They have paid off a great deal of their debt. Which is impressive none the less.
2. The paid off debt that was not from the Wrexham based franchise. If the debt had been accumulated by the Crusaders they were fair game. However, all this "hidden" debt reaks of the disgusting poison that is Leighton Samuel. edit
I just can't wait for the season to start now. So the Crusaders can put all of this behind them, and start whooping your 's again
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 6096 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Apr 2009 | 16 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jun 2015 | Oct 2014 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Spongolium "I'm just poking at possible answers here. But I believe the RFL have been a little more lienient on the crusaders for two reasons.
1. They have paid off a great deal of their debt. Which is impressive none the less.
2. The paid off debt that was not from the Wrexham based franchise. If the debt had been accumulated by the Crusaders they were fair game. However, all this "hidden" debt reaks of the disgusting poison that is Leighton Samuel.edit
I just can't wait for the season to start now. So the Crusaders can put all of this behind them, and start whooping your booty's again ![]()
That's just as much guess work as anything else on here. For all we know the debate about paying debt could of been between paying 20% and 30% of it not neccesairily say 65% and 75%!
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 6096 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Apr 2009 | 16 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jun 2015 | Oct 2014 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: tb "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
That's a no then, as no direct evidence on either side bar taking over cases into account their is no point carrying on. Undermining? I don't get that context, the only undermining is adapting rules to fit different parties.
All I will end on is the fool the one who looks wide and see's things with an open clear mind or the one who keeps his eyes shuts and waits for developments to effect them / really mess the game up. I just hope those with influence start getting their act together sooner rather than later.
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 18736 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jan 2006 | 19 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Nov 2013 | Jan 2013 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: J20 "That's just as much guess work as anything else on here.'"
And let's face it, most of this thread has been exactly that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
