After the RFL came out with their nonsense at the end of July following the Government's latest Covid travel details & cancelled both Halifax & Batley trips to France, they said they would review things after the next Govt Statement which happened last week. So will they force York to be the only part time side to go?
Does anyone believe the covid situation in both England & France will change at all between 25th September & 10th October? I guess the only thing that could change would be more vaccinations otherwise no part time team could travel. Any p/t player would have had to of had their 2nd jab no later than 25th September to be available for the Million Pound game. So if they haven't had their 1st, they will struggle to get it done. Of course the crooks could make Toulouse play their home game & MP game here.
Be interesting to see what rubbish they come out with this week.
I read it but I don't believe it. Strange that P/T teams can go in what 4 weeks for the playoffs when nothing is likely to have changed but not in 9 days. Still no RFL justification of this dumb decision.
I read it but I don't believe it. Strange that P/T teams can go in what 4 weeks for the playoffs when nothing is likely to have changed but not in 9 days. Still no RFL justification of this dumb decision.
As there is another travel review between now and first game of play offs and a good couple of weeks between that review and when Touousw would play it gives a reasonable amount of time to make plans whatever they are.
Yes NB you are correct (not often) the next review is due 15th/16th September with any changes 4 days later. A friend of mine in the Foreign Offices feels there is little medical reasons for France to move to either Green or Red in next couple of months but never rule out a political decision. They may be right or wrong who knows. On that basis, the RFL are saying in their own statement that p/t players cannot go to France on 28th August & 11th September to protect their other employment (although they have not appeared to have carried out any investigation into what effect home quarantining would have on that employment) but they can go on 2nd/3rd October (semi) & I assume the MPG will be in Toulouse if they get there on 9th/10th October irrespective of the situation (Red excepted of course).
The most damning part of their statement is the last paragraph where they say that neither Toulouse ( & why should they?) nor York should be penalised for circumstances beyond their control. Problem is, both Batley & now York were in control of those circumstances. It was a matter of choice for both clubs & players whether they vaccinated. Not saying they should force players but they should have pressured them to do so as all clubs are required to fulfill fixtures. A player that does not vaccinate makes themselves unavailable for games in France unless they want to home quarantine. A player with a broken leg is unavailable too as would Kear be if his team were due to play but the Fire Brigade said sorry son we're short on shift can't release you. Earlier this season i think Broncos had a goodly number of players from our top 25 unavailable through injury. Maybe not 7 but 5 or 6, was there any suggestion the game would be cancelled? Not on your northern Nelly mate.
You explain why Broncos failing to fulfill a fixture is treated differently from Cas & Huddersfield being found guilty of failing to fulfill a fixture has been?
Sorry to have to rehash all this again but not sure why you cannot see this is not a covid issue but an availability of players one.
Joined: Apr 03 2002 Posts: 4958 Location: North West
Still find it difficult as a Club, we did not stand more firm! with the RFL, in the media especially! I am not for clubs who think they run the game, but being firm with genuine strong views, is only right. I sent quite a few messages of protest, but I'm only a supporter,
jaybs wrote:Still find it difficult as a Club, we did not stand more firm! with the RFL, in the media especially! I am not for clubs who think they run the game, but being firm with genuine strong views, is only right. I sent quite a few messages of protest, but I'm only a supporter,
In truth, I do not believe that the RFL take note any input, Especially if that input is negative.
Victor wrote:In truth, I do not believe that the RFL take note any input, Especially if that input is negative.
I've no doubts about that! what amazes me is the salary paid! to the current and last incumbent! it is a complete Joke!
The thing with the RFL is that they only appoint from within. Therefore it is a case of you scratch my back and I will scratch yours.. What is needed is some fresh blood, From outside the sport and I think not from the North of England.
Deadcowboys1 wrote:When you look at Rimmer's CV you realise just what a poor choice he was. He still seems to be missing so has he become the new "Where's Wally?"
There was a board meeting on 25th August. I wonder if Ralphy was in attendance. I suppose it may have been a zoom meeting and he was involved from wherever he is hiding.
Deadcowboys1 wrote:When you look at Rimmer's CV you realise just what a poor choice he was. He still seems to be missing so has he become the new "Where's Wally?"
There was a board meeting on 25th August. I wonder if Ralphy was in attendance. I suppose it may have been a zoom meeting and he was involved from wherever he is hiding.
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
