Quote Kosh="Kosh"There are actually some facts about if you look hard enough. And want to see them.'"
Meaningless babble.
Quote KoshCrusaders were a shambles and as I've said elsewhere the RFL were to blame for ignoring warnings about Samuels and clearly not carrying out a proper 'fit and proper persons' test on Moss and Roberts. I didn't see Woods' interview so I'll refrain from commenting other than to say that he could have been persuasive eloquence personified and it still wouldn't have helped, such is the entrenched attitude towards the RFL right now.'"
You say this in hindsight but it's not what you were saying at the time. Not only were Crusaders a shambles, the RFL have been a shambles ignoring the massive warning signs and the propaganda about the strength of their club when there were plenty who could see the fragility of it all. People wanted it to be a success, ergo, they ignored their best senses. I can understand that, if not the reaction to the fans who didn't share their optimism.
As for Wood, you obviously didn't see it. Eloquence would have been wonderful. Coherence would have been nice. Stumbling over every question, repeatedly failing to answer anything asked, which is a sign of dishonesty, well it is completely fair to say that it was not really acceptable. It was political speak, all of it. No substance. No amount of insight. It was like Question Time, although less professional. If he had nothing to hide, he wouldn't have been so guarded. I don't think they honestly considered the Fax bid for one second. They were throwing wakefield out, and then something happened. Crusaders pulled out at the nth hour. Despite making very recent signings for next season. And when they pulled out, for whatever reason, the RFL went with the easy option instead of working out how they could make Halifax work. Thats a theory, we will never know the complete truth.
Quote KoshAdministration can't be held against a club now because the rules were changed. Not hard to understand. '"
It is very very hard to understand actually. Why they changed the rule in the first place for instance. Was it to protect Crusaders? I think it was. Has it been used now to protect the status quo now? Yes it has. Does it make any sense whatsoever? Probably not.
Sorry but you're asking me to dismiss the administration as it is now part of the rules to ignore it. Except it was the only reason given why my club was kept out of super league last time. What has changed? Apart from the goalposts? Saying "its in the rules now" doesn't cut it for a second.
Quote KoshNeither [ishould[/i it be hard to understand that the 'competition' is about ALL the things you mentioned plus others. It's the overall package that counts. For some reason this seems to be a difficult concept for some fans - and to be fair some commentators - to grasp.
Finally - there has been plenty of rage on here and the Fax board, whether you feel it's justified or not.'"
The problem is, when you're looking at a whole package, it is absolutely impossible to prove from the championship that you will better a super league outfit. More money involved, more crowds (due to human nature) it is much easier to run things like youth setups and have better crowds. This is no reason to protect wakefield indefinitely at the expense of Halifax. When a club has had a season like they have, have defaulted on several promises for a new stadium, have recently been through administration, you have to wonder what they'd have to do to actually get replaced.
As for the rage thing, yeah, standard b.s. tactic designed to throw muck at people. Grow up.