I live in Halifax, Siddal is on side of a hill anspd as was said one road in and if something is happening at the church that one road will be packed

So, for argument's sake let's just say they beat us and progress to the next round and then draw Whino's or Wigan at home. Would the RFL allow them to play that game at home ???

Being unable to stand rules me out then.

This is the tin pot RFL we are talking about, so who knows ?
However they have now set a precedent. They have also done the same with the Fev game at Thatto Heath. So basically minimum standards no longer exist, because after this farce how can they now force any team to comply.

Also what if you need seating theres none of that

You'd think that the police and/or council would have something to say on safety grounds. I know our capacity was restricted by 'elf and safety', but a quick look at their facilities on Google Maps makes me think that it would be virtually impossible to exercise any reasonable crowd control.

They haven't actually agreed it will be played there yet.

I've always presumed minimum standards was a Super League thing rather than RFL?

This isn't a super league game.

But...but...Aaron Bower understands it will be played at Siddall.

Not wanting to come over as being pedantic but, the wording in the statement says “minimum requirements” which although looks like the same thing, it isn't. Which begs the question, why have minimum requirements and then dismiss them in a situation like this.
The community games minimum “standards” are totally different to SL/championship & L1, the challenged cup at this stage is no longer a community controlled game, so the minimum “requirements” for holding the fixture differs to the minimum “standards” for the community game.

That's exactly my point. I think FT responds with a good, if somewhat pedantic

, point though.