Keighley meeting with there solicitors at 4.30 today to find out what action they can take.

I suggest an online fundraising campaign to fund legal expenses. Must be deja vu for the Keighley supporters - I feel for them. But not for their idiot of a coach!

so what was doncasters 'evidence' ? you broke the rules just like Batley.
the reason you got off was breaches the previous season that were not
punished so how can you rubbish batley's case ?
Kevin Nicholas is a solicitor so i would have expected the case he put
forward would have been far more comprehensive and detailed than
Carl Hall's probable "come on bro's, give us a break bro's,eh bro ?

tbh id prefer batley to stay up because I really like going to mount pleasant to watch rugby and for anyone who has tasted their chips, its worth the entrance fee alone , but in all fairness they should be in championship one. if you break the rules you should be punished .

Not rubbishing anything, just saying what happened. Batley we're asking for more time to put their case together and for the hearing to be postponed until they spoke to doncaster about their intentions.

The 'evidence' was the evidence of the previous years breaches that they had researched and compiled, and the conversation with an RFL staff member who confirmed the player was eligible to play.

Personally I wouldn't have appealed, I said so at the time, I'd have taken the punishment on the chin and moved on.

You do know there are more people involved in doncaster than Carl Hall right? You know, lawyers and that bro?

You'd have thought the top management at the RFL could have come up with some sort of offer pretty quickly to Keighley to avoid them having to resort to legal action. A nil cost option to the RFL might be to compensate Keighley for the detriment resulting from the RFL mess up following Batley (and Doncaster) not being punished for fielding ineligible players.

A fair outcome for both Batley and Keighley (considering Keighley has been relegated as a result of Batley winning the match in which the ineligible player played and scored) would be for both clubs to get the same level of central funding for 2015. Instead of Batley getting £150,000 and Keighley getting £75,000, both should get £112,500.

Should imagine a majority of clubs would support that if it had to be put to a vote.

...and every club in Championship1 - which is where Keighley are going to play, after all - would be howling with outrage. feel sorry for Keighley, but that's not the solution.

Think it could be. A couple of clubs in the Championship getting half a million in 2015 with the majority getting only £150k was pretty easily accepted subject to a bit of chuntering. Even if you think that extra money would get Keighley promoted, there's 2 promotion spots from League 1 to the Championship next season - double this year's. If it's deemed the best of a bad lot of solutions it would get voted through even if the current Championship clubs weren't particularly for it. The detriment suffered by Keighley is partly that they will no doubt have pre-existing contractual and other financial commitments that say Coventry or Oxford and others don't have.

It's the Championship 1 clubs (and probably the other relegated Championship clubs) who would be kicking up a fuss if the RFL tried to change the goalposts after the rules about payments were announced/agreed. The RFL would be out of the frying pan & into the fire with the likes of York/Hunslet (or whoever doesn't get promoted this year) up in arms at a relegated Championship club suddenly being given far more than had been agreed.

Did that happen at the original hearing or the appeal ?

So my question is, if the RFL do nothing and Batley now go on and win the Grand Final, what kind of reaction is there going to be, as I imagine that scenario would really make the RFL look more inept and that really would be setting a precedent.