Smokey, do you blame Ian Lenighan for Wigans breaches of the salary cap?

Not having any more money for WFC could also be read as 'not prepared to put any more money in, and we're fed up with people saying they're going to buy the club and then apparently changing their minds'. It seems to me that the person muddying the waters is Stephanie Booth, and without her something would have been hammered out (possibly literally!) between Moss and Roberts on the one hand and the Supporters Trust on the other by now.

No, I dont. That would be ridiculous.

But Wakefields failures are Wakefields failures, wishing another club suffers to cover up those failures is pathetic.

Unless you were a Wakefield fan?

Firstly Smokey, yes, it is a little pro-Wakefield but that is because this folly called Crusaders has already failed twice and looks ever more likely to not have a viable financial footing IMO, unlike Wakefield, who now absolutley do.

Also, as Hopie and others have pointed out, yours seems to be a pro-Crusaders bias! You are correct Crusaders is now no longer owned by the Wrexham Village Ltd Holding Company, it is a new phoenix orphan company... but is has the same major shareholder and directors, Moss and Robert!!! These two directors have stated that they 'unable to continue' putting money into a loss making venture, you are correct, it does not state that they don't have any more money, just that they are 'unable'. So you are the RFL, we know Crusaders is a loss making venture, even more so at the moment given their reduced Sky money, and the two same people that are unable to continue to support Wrexham FC are the future of this Super League Club for another 3 years!!! So you kick out Wakefield, who now have a viable financial footing, an owner willing to spend up to the salary cap if they stay in Super League by topping up the shortfall, versus two characters whom have managed, at least one and possibly now two, other sports companies into administration!

Also, this very dodgy final statement about the Crusaders having a long term lease at the Racecourse ground... err they own it and might be selling it, so if they have to sell then how can the future of that lease be certain under a new ownership... it can't!

I am all for expansion but this has got silly now, if the Racecourse ground gets sold, the RFL should get a good part of it's money back and they should then cut their loses and move on, otherwise they risk losing face and even more money!

No, it would always be pathetic. I wish the best for all our clubs. If that means mine is left behind, so be it.

i wondered why this thread wasnt making sense, then realised its because i have Smokey on 'Ignore'.

That is now a stupid comment... Wakefield now have a firm and viable future financial footing, Crusaders appear not to have! No one, including the majority of Wakefield fans, are covering up the recent financial issues and previous failures but that is the point you are missing... previous, not current. You can see why they might now be a little hacked off, with people like you wishing them to suffer because of their previous history under another owner... that is pathetic!

The only person being pathetic here is you... wishing Wakefield suffer because of previous financial issues under another owner. In actual fact, pathetic hypocrite would be correct, because you don't wish all our clubs the best do you?

and how many times has this Wakefield folly failed over the last 100+years.

they only look ever more likely to fail to those how have already decided they will and are looking around for any evidence, however poor, to back up their prejudice.

So everything on this thread from that release is completely irrelevent to crusaders. There is even a specific not to say Crusaders are unaffected yet you are using it as evidence of their impending doom. Do we? I dont, How on earth do you? We know they were, but we also know that when they went bust they put the blame down to servicing historical debts from the Leighton Samuel era, These now dont exist. But they have fewer debts to service.

They are unable to put money into a business venture they specifically say will never pay off for them. Its fairly understandable, why would they want to? And what has Andrew Glover proved? you think a couple of months proves he knows how to run an RL club? Who is to know that if in a years time Wakefield dont get newmarket and the club is still losing a couple of hundred grand a year, even more know Glover wants to spend the cap, he wont decide to just jack it in? I doubt very much he is rich enough to be putting £500k a year in for the next 6 years.

The lease would be guaranteed under any new ownership. Crusaders own the lease to it, selling the freehold to that property wouldnt mean the lease could be cancelled.
so right now Crusaders dont own the racecourse ground, and have a long term lease on it. If the owners of the racecourse ground sell it, and Crusaders still dont own the racecourse ground and still have a long term lease on it one is fine but somehow the other is silly? will Wakefield own newmarket or have a long term lease on it? will the freehold be owned by AG or by another company? Do Wakefield even own the freehold on Belle Vue or is a long term lease? If its a long term lease should the RFL cut their losses?

Im not wishing them to suffer. I hope they go from strength to strength.

Wakefield may or may not have a firm and viable future financial footing. It has yet to be proven. Im simply not convinced by a couple of months of being relatively stable has got rid of all the deep structural problems within Wakefield that has seen them struggle for so long.

Again, I do hope Wakefield succeed. What have I said which has brought you to a different conclusion?

It seems clear to me you lack confidence in your argument, hence you trying to attribute things to me which are blatantly wrong.

Smokey,

It’s all very well preaching the virtues of this Welsh experiment from your Ivory Towers of Headingley.

Unless it was your club that was facing expulsion from the top table you cannot get a true feel for it.

However admirable, the Welsh expansion has been a botched job. They are trying to compete with Clubs with a wealth of traditional supporters & junior structures etc. In order to simply compete on the field, their playing staff consists mainly of 2nd rate Antipodeans. The novelty value has now worn off and without limited success the crowds will continue to bump along.

Do the majority of Wakefield fans believe that their club is in better shape than the Crusaders, sure they do. Do they believe the dreamers at Red Hall think their club’s in better shape, of course not

If the Welsh licence was to crumble giving Wakefield a last gasp reprieve, their fans would feel vindicated – not pathetic.

It allows me to take an overall view. You admit yours is tied up in your bias, which is understandable.

And we have seen, this season, and in the last round of franchises, a club with a wealth of traditional supporters and junior structures fail massively. Wakefield have relied on mainly 2nd rate antipodeans for almost all of their SL lifespan. Look at HKA a club with a wealth of traditional supporters and junior structures relying on 2nd rate antipodeans.
Of course Wakefield fans think their club is in better shape.

And did Wakefields collapse and trouble vindicate those who argued for expansion? Or vindicate those who argued there wasnt space for 2 SL clubs in WMDC

I have put together a reasoned argument as to why I think Crusaders should not be given a new franchise under the ownership of Moss and Roberts, the only prejudiced person here is you, who clearly wish to see Wakefield fail out of some warped sense of justice... did someone from Wakefield run-over your dog? Wakefield folly... what a joker you are, they have been around since 1873, hardly a folly mate, and while they have had financial problems in that time, so as every other major club... p1ss poor argument!



Because I can do sums mate, being an Engineer I studied maths, so if income (excluding monies put in by owners, because that is the point) is less than expenditure you make a loss. So 1500 paying punters for their recent game leads me to believe that they are probably making a loss, week in, week out... to be fair, so are many clubs, Saints included! They owe £700k to the RFL of which the RFL are stopping off payment at source from their sky money. So their income from Sky is less than any other club in the RFL... does this look like a business turning a profit to you?



Thank you for helping me further prove my hypothesis... that is what you meant to do, is it not... Moss and Roberts could do exactly the same yes... you understand that! BTW, Wakefield were making around a £100k loss per annum under Ted, but I understand that they currently are balancing the books without current financial input from Glover... and they are above Crusaders in the table!


Why would a lease be guaranteed, a new owner might have to give them notice on the lease, but if they buy the ground as a development opportunity, they could get rid of them and buy them out if required. As for Newmarket, the ground will be owned by the community trust and Wakefield will have a long-term lease agreement... but I am not sure what your point is here! The Bank of Ireland own Belle Vue now and Wakefield do have a lease in place and the Bank of Ireland are not interested in kicking them out just yet... they will wait and sell the ground when the housing market improves for obvious reasons.

Your arguments are poor and are actually going a long way to show why Crusaders are, unfortunately, looking like they really should be the club to lose out, not Wakefield.