You are right to question the club and imo you have always done so in a construtive manner, far too many posters on here need to stop grazing and lift their heads out of the grass from time to time.

Over the years we've not asked enough questions at this club.

Thats about 99% of everything written on these boards.

Glass half full/empty is sometimes difficult to decide upon.

I agree in principle. However when it's the same issue over and over again? Worse still when said issue is uses to make 2+2=500! How the issues with ccj's ends up with the sale of Smith to Salford is utter speculation of the most negative kind. If Tim Smith is wanted by Salford and he wants to go no number of ccj's will make a difference as we simply cannot compete with the money this guy is "allegedly" about to throw around.

I've said it since day one, AG has stabalised the club but we are a way off competing just yet.

HERE HERE! I dont think AG is rich but the guy has opened 2 shops in the City centre gave us a lovely stand at Belle vue helped crowds increase etc. Hes done amazing for us too many people on here cannot wait to stick the boot in. AG has done excellent and gave us 100% . He saves us where is the gratitude? SHORT MEMORIES ONCE AGAIN !

Has Tim Smith been lodging ccj's against us? What's this got to do with him? I watch the team, not the business plan!

The thread started with me posting a rumour from the Salford board about Tim Smith and principally that I would not want McGoldrick at Wakey. The CCJ side of it was an issue that came about in response to a comment you made, following someone else's comments about us maybe needing to cash in.

I never actually suggested that the CCJ's were anything to do with the reason why the club would consider selling Tim or indeed that they even were considering doing so, but merely offering them as one indicator that the club were not necessarily in the best of health financially. Consequently, whilst I am probably guilty of causing the thread to drift off topic, this does not in my opinion constitute putting 2+2 together and getting 5.

I'll explain NGBC so maybe you'll understand what it means.

Constructive criticism is the process of offering valid and well-reasoned opinions about the work of others, usually involving both positive and negative comments, in a friendly manner rather than an oppositional one

Its what adults do.

Baa.

I probably caused the thread to drift off topic, but in response to your comment, the business plan has a direct impact on whose in the team your watching.

So leave worrying about it to those whose job it is. When I'm watching Tim unlock a defence with a well timed pass I don't think "I hope the club pays the caterers or we might lose him".

I keep hearing about the CCJ situation and I have kept off giving and informed opinion on the situation but feel now is the time to say something.
Firstly a CCJ is not a direct indicator of financial sustainability, it is purely an indicator that there is a discrepancy between what company/person A thinks is owed to them by company/person B.
It is often used as a lever by one party to another to force some kind of settlement out of them.
The cost of asking a court to rule on a CCJ is relatively cheap (depending on size of debt) and with the advent of online applications (as with the Northampton county court) makes it very simple to do with no need to employ and expensive legal advisor.
IMO these CCJ's that currently sit on WTW may cause some administrative concern but it does not worry my financially

The CCJs might have been paid but it can still show against the club if the small amount (was £1 a few years ago)to mark the CCJ as paid has not also been paid.

Silly comparison,BT established years with a net worth of millions and millions,Spirit of 1873,new start business with a negative net worth of over £1m

www.justice.gov.uk/courts/northa ... -questions This may help with some of the common misconceptions posted on here about ccjs and the role Northampton plays.

www.justice.gov.uk/courts/northa ... -questions This may help with some of the common misconceptions posted on here about ccjs and the role Northampton plays.

Yeah mainly what i do it usually ends up in name. calling. Think its daft why Glover should be questioned hes done more in 2years than anyone in the last 40years.

Rubbish.

Who the hell got us in SL and kept us there for 10 years. A lot of people have done a huge amount to keep this club going and to dismis them and give all the credit to AG is grossly unfair. If anyone has a short memory it's you.

Well it would be wouldn't it.

Honestly I get the point but as an issue it's run it's course for now and doesn't seem to be an issue to anyone but a few on here.

Back on topic - given that several clubs are on the hunt for quality hb's, there'll always be speculation about Tim Smith; he is, after all, one of the best in SL.

His signing felt like a gamble at the time but since he found his form, many 'bigger' clubs will perceive that we don't have any right to have a player of that quality in our ranks.

It's worth noting that sometimes this is driven by fans rather than the clubs themselves; recall some Hull FC fans last season, who if you read their board, appeared to believe that Mr Pearson had first refusal on every player in the game. I guess with Salford's new cashed-up status and the flamboyant statements from the Dr, this could well be a similar scenario.

Hope so anyway - Smith is quality and we need to retain him.

Tim Smith is playing great rugby for us, and has been since he properly settled in last year, for him to change clubs could be very unsettling for him personally and stability and certainty of his surroundings could be a major factor for wakefield to retain such a good player. (if indeed there is any truth in him being of interest to Salford)

Smith has already played more games for us than anyone else apart from Parramatta. It is obviously working for him and he seems to be enjoying his rugby.

If he was to be swayed by money, I'd have thought he'd be able to get a gig back in Sydney now, but I wonder whether he would just rather be with us.

Think maybe the noisey North Stand need to remind him how loved and wanted he is at the next game?

With the exception of one or two salford fans, most of us are realists. Whilst we would all like to see the very best come to the club, the level of arrogance shown by many hull fans last season does not exist at Salford, but it doesn't stop us dreaming.

If you're management are willing to sell, Tim Smith would be excellent signing, as he's played really for Wakefield. By the way, Noble doesn't want new signings based purely on the money, so if that was smith's motivation, chances are we wouldn't sign him.

Good luck with the rest of your season.

To Vastman ....
Despite getting us into SL.... Who was the ONLY owner willing to Merge ???
In case you've forgotten
TED !!!!
Peddling myths again I suppose !!!

This is the most relative point regarding Tim Smith, he's happy where he is, personally and professionally.
The importance of that to his form and health is not lost on him!

Indeed - I don't read your board, so I guess I've only seen the posts of some of the more hyperactive Salford fans who've posted on here and the VT; Hull FC is a good lesson in a new owner making bold claims, getting the fans all excited, only to find out that RL doesn't quite bend to their will in the way that they may be used to.

The Salford project is an exciting one and I'm genuinely pleased for the fans of the club - I hope it works out (without Tim Smith) but I think it will take a while.

Message to Micka - what the hell has that got to do with anything.

You really are a foolish poster. The vote was put to the shareholders as it had to be and they agreed almost unanimously to merge.

Added to that there was virtually no opposition from the terraces. Clarky and a few others had a go, one of the posters on here Jinjer bravely staged a walk on protest but he will be the first to admit there was almost total indifference from most fans. In fact if I recall those making the protest took some abuse at the time.

As for Cas, of course they rejected it because they knew they were safe.

So again answer the question - who got this club back in SL, who bankrolled it for ten years etc etc? I bet it wasn't you who put your house up as insurance against the CVA caused by the last White Knight Mr Pearman blatant lies. People like you talk the talk whilst others put their money where there mouth are.

I'm sick to death of bar room lawyers trying to re-write history to suit their petty agendas. In my experience I have come across many club directors and some are as dumb as soup but non deliberately meant to harm the club as they all thought they were doing their best at the time.

Give it a rest please.

Is this the same Tim Smith that was being pulled limb from limb by some on this forum after the Warrington game?