I actually feel sorry for the genuine Wigan Athletic fans with this. It appears that the PL don't really want small teams (that's no derogatory) in their "club". They would much rather have clubs with a big following, ala Newcasle, Leeds, Notts Forest etc.

If you read Whelans rant, that is IMO what he is alluding to.

Latics are a club built on sand, they were never going to survive in the premiership forever. I dont buy into the PL trying to get rid of them because theyre a small club either, thats just rubbish.

*edit*
Roma and Lazio both play in the same stadium as another example

I suppose the FA could argue grass has a much longer growing season in Italy and Spain, therefore less wear and tear

Saying that there are loads of clubs in england that have football and rugby playing on them and their pitches are in great condition, so it wouldnt really hold up as an argument in court

If this did go to court any decent lawyer would rip FA's case to shreads

There's not much evidence that the PL are enamoured by Latics.

It was okay at first - there was something vaguely romantic about a little club trying to punch above its weight in the big league. But I think a few of the old stagers are now getting tired of it. Latics seem to get belittled in the football press an awful lot. Not just over the pitch, but for their crowds etc - commentators never seem to miss an opportunity to mention the Warriors.

My Latics fanatic neighbour assures me that stuff we deem to be anti-Wigan RL in the nationals is, in reality, anti-Wigan Athletic. He reckons that many footie fans feel our stadium-sharing deal is a sign that Latics aren't really a Premiership standard club and thus resent Latics' presence at the top level.

No they don't.

I agree all that's right in principle. In law it's a different thing. Without seeing the paperwork (and so making some assumptions) I can think of at least one justifiable challenge to our lease. Given a good legal team and the actual documents I'm sure there are others.

For those thinking the law is an asolute; it isn't. It is a living, evolving entity. If that were not the case we wouldn't have cases being tried and then overturned on appeal for example. In these cases at least one of the verdicts was 'wrong'. I say "at least" because both verdicts could be shown to be 'incorrect' by subsequent appeals or even different cases. Don't even get me started on cases such as OJ!!

There WILL be justifiable (in the legal rather than moral sense) challenges to our lease. Trust me on this. Whether they are successful or not is purely down to the courts. There are no 'givens' in this.

Who has actually every said that? You obviously think it's more than one.

Talk about a raw nerve.

In our last exchange on this, you implied that it was deeply sad that so many Wigan RL fans didn't like Latics, and vice versa. I think you were supported, possibly indirectly, by one or two others. Bondi Warrior maybe.

My view is that it doesn't really matter. Nobody is required to support anybody, no matter which town they originate from.

Now, feel free to pick me up on the fine detail of posts past and present, but you'll be wasting your time. You asking picky questions and me having to answer them is not how it works.

I'm sure there are plenty of 'knuckle-draggers', as you'd call them, on this thread who you can have a bit of fun with. I'm rather surprised that you haven't done that already.

How is pointing out you were clearly talking bollox, touching a raw nerve? In the context of the discussion you were having with Phuzzy it was a bizarre thing to say. You've been called out yet again for claiming things that clearly aren't true - the only nerve that seems to be touched is yours, that lead to say these things without the ability to back it up when it concerns the Latics.



I've never done anything of the sort - so that's yet another thing you've got wrong.



There's no need to pick up on the fine detail - you can't even back-up your main claim.

To end this now before it gets boring for everyrone else.

Wigan / Leeds Andy on March 10thincredibly sad and immature."

"Sitting on both sides of the 'divide' I think those that have the chip on their shoulder about one thing or another to do with the other club are pretty pathetic,"

Not word for word, but more or less right. You were clearly making a moral judgement, which is the thing I took issue with. Case rested.

I heard of scraping the barrel but that's pretty desperate even for you.

Do you want to explain how that is eitherlike Latics"

I've emphasised the word like for you as you clearly don't understand what the word means.

When you said "Not word for word" you were certainly right. In fact "nowhere near and completely wrong" were the words you were obviously searching for to summarise what you said and have been completely unable to prove.

Far too late for that

Let’s not split hairs too much (something you seem to thrive on).

In the post I quoted, you claimed that those RL fans who have issues with Latics are ‘sad’, ‘immature’, ‘pathetic’. In other words they’re ‘wrong’.

My view, which I hinted at in the post you picked up on earlier (when that raw nerve of yours got twanged again), is that every sports fan is entitled to like or dislike any club or team he chooses without moral obligation. They don’t need to offer justification, or even have a reason. It’s sport. So just deal with it and stop being so bloody self-righteous all the time.

Nice attempt to derail the thread, by the way. I think it worked.

PS to Catalancs. Sorry, you're right. It's now boring. But I've made my point as clearly as I can, so I'm gone.

~