I seem to hear calls for transparency from the RFL and in the game in general, especially where there are threads concerning Crusaders, Harlequins and any decision from the RFL that a fan disagreed wtih.

What I want to know is what would it change if there was transparency from the RFL?

A lot of fans do not believe the RFL whatever they say so why would this 'tranparency' be taken on face value.

My guess is if the RFL were being transparent and said "We've given Crusaders X amount and have given Quins X amount in the past" certain posters would take an I told you so stance and blast the RFL. If the RFL said that no money has been handed out to help said clubs posters would label them liars and say that money has been handed out regardless.

As far as I can see the RFL are damned if they do and damned if they don't. The fact is whatever they say people view it differently depending on agenda (anti-expansion, pro-expansion etc) and ignore the facts regardless. If transprency arrived at the level that anybody called for the whole saga would remain as clear as mud. People's viewpoints would still be motivated by what they wanted in the present and future regardless of facts.

I think it would make a terrific difference.

The RFL often claim one thing and then do another; this just lends itself to conspiracy theories when they actually tell the truth.

They were willing to turn a blind eye to salary cap breeches by Crusaders when in the NLs. The people who pointed this out were labelled hateful flatcappers and later it emerges that those players were supposedly professional picture framers playing amateur rugby for no fee! (and working illegally to boot).

What does this do but make claims that the RFL was paying for hotels and flights for Crusaders seem plausible? I don't believe this myself but the lack of honesty in other areas causes people to believe these things.

Does it?

Or does the RFL say one thing, and then random fans imagine they've done another?

My god you're delusion has reached new bounds. Can't be bothered to traipse through the internet finding evidence, but are you seriously suggesting that the RFL have never backtracked on anything?

Who can say? There is no evidence to back either argument is there?

Random fans and the UK Borders Agency.

Not if you're going to ignore or deliberately refuse to believe it, no.


As an example: I point to the perennial "The RFL bailed out London Broncos" posts that have been appearing on these boards with monotonous regularity, irrespective of how many times the facts are pointed out.



Go one then, I'll bite.

Name one single instance of the UKBA accusing the RFL of saying one thing and doing another …


In fact all you do is prove my case.

When did Crusaders breach the salary cap?

This is my exact point about people making up their own 'facts'. I cannot ever remember the Crusaders breaching salary caps and the RFL turning a blind eye.

All they were found guilty of was playing on the wrong VISA's. The salary cap did not come into it. Or do you have proof to suggest otherwise?

classic

ditto:

I didn't say that the UKBA did anything of the kind.

What I said was that Crusaders were breeching the salary cap rules came out when the UKBA started investigating.

It is not just my opinion that Crusaders were declaring that certain full-time players were on £0 per week and were getting their salaries from Dekor plc. That's what came out.

They were paid by Dekor plc as picture framers and were supposedly playing rugby in their spare time. This is exactly the kind of "boot money" that we love to criticise in rugby union.

I look forward to the link of the details published when this 'came out'.

No its not. That's what came out in your imagination.

What the UKBA investigation revealed was that six Australians were in the country on student visas which did now allow them to work. And yet they worked as professional rugby players.

No evidence of salary cap breaches.

No evidence that they were working as something else while pretending to be amateur players (in fact quite the opposite – they were deported for being employed and paid as rugby league players while on a visa which didn't allow them to work).

No amount of 'transparency' from the RFL would mean them backing up random imagined 'facts' that don't actually exist in the real world




Provide evidence to back that up, you're sailing dangerously close to libel

I will try to find a link but right now I'm a bit busy to be doing extensive googling.

Not too busy to be posting rumours, just too busy to back them up.

How convenient.

Meanwhile you might find this part of the Championship salary cap regulations interesting

It takes two minutes (or less) to reply to a post.

Googling rugby league subjects can take rather longer, especially when you are interested in a detail that the UKBA themselves weren't particularly interested in.

thats quite a transparent post tb

But if you 'know' this, and haven't just imagined it, you'll know where you know it from.


Or we can conclude that you've posted some unsubstantiated rumour and hope a random google search will provide evidence to back it up, even though you don't actually know if there is any.

Or perhaps he should just repeat it three times.

That makes it true automatically doesn't it tb?

Or is it just when YOU repeat something 3 times it becomes automatically true?

Just give me time. I'll try and do it this evening.

The thing is the players were deported because they were working illegally. It doesn't make any difference to the UKBA whether they were rugby players or picture framers and hence most reports don't beyond surface issues.

Speaking of unsubstantiated rumours... you still haven't backed up your assertion from the "Crusaders coming out of administration" thread with evidence. In fact you seem to be making a point of ignoring it



"tb wrote:Interestingly, what Crusaders haven't done, for example, is announce with no warning that the club is in administration leaving all their employees without jobs - which, coincidentally, is what Widnes did in October 2007. Widnes were allowed to reform, without their previous debts, and compete NL1 in 2008."

There you go. We all know how you love evidence to back up claims.

It's possible that the players who said they were left unemployed and signed for other clubs as free agents were lying, I suppose. If not likely.

And as for the reforming without the previous debts: that's what administration is.

I don't think it would make that much difference. Like any other Governing Body, Council or Government or referee they're never going to please all the people all the time. Admittedly they could do better in certain areas. For instance, when they released the results of the Franchise Applications they could have released the entire report, not one paragraph on each club. I think that in particular has caused a lot of problems and suspicion. On the whole they strike a fairly decent balance.

Look at the Gareth Thomas-Cas incident. Some folk seem to think it higlights how the RFL take a dim view of small Heartland clubs. Even despite him being the most famous Rugby player in world rugby at the time, despite him being on a BBC doc looking at homophobia, despite a well-known female sportcastor bagging RL live on air and despite Cas' previous history of crowd trouble, it was the RFL's fault.

I would imagine that the RFL and Cas had been working together to draw up plans for better crowd control. I also would imagine that a memo would have been sent out to all clubs saying the RFL are taking a zero tolerance policy on insults thrown at Gareth Thomas considering his media profile and the attention it had placed on the game.

Whether you think Cas or the RFL are right or wrong, I don't care. I don't want to open this up for a Cas discussion again and, no, I can't substantiate what I imagine had happened behind the scenes, but my point is that an awful lot happens behind the scenes that we don't really need to know about. If the RFL had sent a memo out to all clubs about zero tolerance, do we really need to know that and if they put it in a press release, how would that look to other sports and journalists that wanted to or already had bagged us?