I totally agree with you, it was wrong to renew March's contract mid season, that should have been postponed until the end of the season or at the very least conditional on us making the playoffs.
With regard to the Batley fiasco, I know a lot of supporters are upset with the RL but if we are relugated the main reason will be because we didn't sieze our opportunities, we have lost a lot of games that we should have won and that not the fault of the RL, that's on the team and the coach.
Is a dream a lie if it don't come true. Or is it something worse?
Joined: Jan 16 2004 Posts: 1030 Location: Shoreham-by-Sea
I totally agree 'KRLFC' but I believe that it is also the 'Dual Standards' that the RFL appears to apply that has caused so much criticism.
Let's face it; in how many other so-called 'professional sports' do the administrators appear to be so inept?
So how on earth can they enforce any similar Rules in the future?
They have painted themselves into a corner of future actions and potential litigation which, in my opinion, they will be unable to defend themselves against. How can they? They simply cannot have one Rule for Batley and Doncaster and another for other Clubs (including Keighley).
By the way, does anyone know which Clubs cheated previously and what effect it had on their league positions and central funding?
haven,York,town are said to be 3 of the 5 clubs who breached the regs last season,in playing DR players in the NRCup and playing players after deadline, we are suppose to have breached it with clough (in league and NR cup) but in both games we got tonked once by you and had no effect on league position, Town said to have breached it with craven in the league(rumours he was on loan,but played for Widnes during that time so can't have been) and leulaui in the NR cup,not sure about York or two other clubs. no club should be allow d to gain league position via playing noneligible players,that's why batley should have the game points removed
Proud to be NL1
Last edited by haven4ever on Sun Aug 31, 2014 10:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
KRLFC wrote:I totally agree with you, it was wrong to renew March's contract mid season, that should have been postponed until the end of the season or at the very least conditional on us making the playoffs.
With regard to the Batley fiasco, I know a lot of supporters are upset with the RL but if we are relugated the main reason will be because we didn't sieze our opportunities, we have lost a lot of games that we should have won and that not the fault of the RL, that's on the team and the coach.
Batley played a player who scored and won them the game when he should NOT have been on the pitch. Do you think we would have got away with it given what happened with March?
I actually think we have done well this season in parts a do not deserve to go down when other teams play players that are not allowed on the pitch!
IMO the only route now available to the RFL is to scrap the dual reg. How can it continue now, because any team that breaches in the future will refer to anecdotal evidence of Batley, Doncaster, Haven etc. The only way a player from a SL club or another other league can play for another club should be via transfer or loan. I appreciate the loan has a minimum period (1 month I think) but I just can't see how dual reg can continue.
Last year Whitehaven and York did same braech as Batley & Doncasyer this season.
Last year, Whitehaven were already safe from relegation (even if they'd been docked 3 points) and not in play-offs. York already in a relegation place.
So decision on sanctions simply being a caution seems sort of ok - no additional impact on funding either.
This year is totally different with the Batley & Doncaster breaches with the effect on relegation and funding based on finishing position. 3 points deductions seems sort of ok.
But idiot appeals panel blindly follows what happened last year despite completely different circumstances.
Cross Hills Cougar wrote:Last year Whitehaven and York did same braech as Batley & Doncasyer this season.
Last year, Whitehaven were already safe from relegation (even if they'd been docked 3 points) and not in play-offs. York already in a relegation place.
So decision on sanctions simply being a caution seems sort of ok - no additional impact on funding either.
This year is totally different with the Batley & Doncaster breaches with the effect on relegation and funding based on finishing position. 3 points deductions seems sort of ok.
But idiot appeals panel blindly follows what happened last year despite completely different circumstances.
3 other clubs also breached it last year, and from the rfl statement even they were not aware of any breach last season until presented as evidence by batley at their appeal,its a mess and DR should be scrapped
Joined: Jan 16 2004 Posts: 1030 Location: Shoreham-by-Sea
I think that these comments (copied from the Whitehaven News & Star) say it all about both the RFL and Phil Veivers:
Quote:Whitehaven boss brands RFL a joke after Batley appeal.
Last updated at 12:39, Friday, 29 August 2014 – Whitehaven News & Star
The Bulldogs were originally docked three points after being found guilty of fielding an ineligible dual-registered player. Their deduction moved them into the relegation zone, but now Haven find themselves in 10th place level on 39 league points but behind on actual points difference. Speaking to the News & Star Sport Woods said: “It’s a joke. The RFL is a joke. “I can’t understand how a team can break the rules and get away with it. “In training last night, the players were saying that if they were taking supplements which were banned, but said they didn’t know about it, they would still be suspended from playing for two years. “I thought the original ruling was wrong in the first place because Batley won the game when they fielded their player. “They should have lost the three points they got for winning that game against Sheffield and then should have had another three points taken off them for breaking the rules. They weren’t really punished in the first place.” In a statement announcing the decision the RFL said Batley and Doncaster, who were also deducted three points, presented fresh evidence relating to previous historical breaches of Operational Rules by other clubs who had not faced similar sanctions. The appeals tribunal then overturned the deductions for both sides. In response Woods said: “If other teams have done the same last year, why did they let it go? The person at the RFL who is responsible needs to be held to account. It’s wrong. “You can break the law and not get punished for it.” The deduction also means that Workington are no longer mathematically safe from relegation. Town are five points ahead of both Haven and Batley with two games to go and require just a bonus point against Leigh to ensure safety. In a statement the Whitehaven board said: “We have been put in a position where we have to win both our remaining games. We are urging our fans to remain positive and to come out and support the players in their game against Rochdale on Sunday.”
Town coach Phil Veivers said: “I’m indifferent if I’m honest. I didn’t think the decision had been set in stone and thought that if they appealed they would get the points back.”
As far as my comment about Phil Veivers is concerned, if anyone disagrees with it I would ask: 'Which Club has benefitted most from Dual Registration (I would suggest Workington with Wigan)
Just looking at the league positions after todays match, Batley and Whitehaven are both on 42 points with ourselves on 43, further up the table Fev are on 58, Doncaster 57 and Halifax on 55. Next week Batley play Doncaster (away) and Whitehaven play Swinton (away) and of course we entertain Fev. With Doncaster getting their 3 points back Fev will contest the match big time, they have to win to ensure 2nd place.
Just playin with some figures, let's say Cougars and Swinton both win, I can foresee 3 clubs suing the RL, Fev, Halifax and Whitehaven ... just a thought!
Is a dream a lie if it don't come true. Or is it something worse?
Joined: Jan 16 2004 Posts: 1030 Location: Shoreham-by-Sea
I can't see Doncaster doing Batley any favours, can you, especially when there's so much money involved for them (for next season)?
We have to win but, for the life in me, I can't see why we do not appear to be motivated, otherwise (from the reports on today's game) we might have won again. It has always been the problem with Keighley teams over the last 50 years.
Anyway, if we don't win, we must restrict Featherstone to beating us by less than 12 points. Sheffield beat them today and we have beaten Sheffield (away) but we must start well.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 45 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
