WormInHand wrote:I read somewhere this week (I can't find a link so it must have been a paper-based article, anyone else seen it?) that Hudge was hoping to field both Mason and Dobson at the derby, and had actually asked for dispensation to do so. He received a hearty "no" in response to that request.
My guess is that Rovers hoped the Tongan PM's letter would, given the circumstances over there, suffice - hence the (misplaced) positivity in the lead up to THE ANNOUNCEMENT. They said no - leaving us with an unpalatable choice, eventually going for Dobson for a number of reasons, likely including the Toulon rumours.
WormInHand wrote:Still think it depends on how the RFL view the whole fiasco, if they apportion any blame to Rovers and how embarrassed they feel. The mighty silence from them from start to finish would indicate they feel a tad compromised, at least. They may also take into consideration how audacious they feel Rovers have been with the continued dispensation requests and if they feel they have been granted more than their fair share of favours.
I also think it will depend on how much of a protest other clubs make and how public these are likely to be. I certainly don't think they intend to "punish" Rovers, more that they will feel it necessary to be seen to be addressing any imbalances.
They'll look forward I'm sure - looking at what would be embarrassing, rather than what has been (can't change that now). It's not like it was done with malice of forethought. Whatever they choose, the club can't complain - but you'd hope and assume they'd indicate their intentions so it doesn't bleed on pointlessly.
. Right - must go and stir that risotto, the Chablis is chilling.
