good whilst it lasts though

with the wakefield, crusaders goings on i dont think it is good tbh.

it makes our game look a poorly run sack of poo.

But this is why the people who are running these clubs should be shamed IMO, the rfl should make an example of one of these poorly run clubs and demote them.
Hopefully it would then force the others to be more prudent.

The King story is nothing we didn't know already.

As for rovers, I quite like them in SL and wouldn't want them to go to the wall. The banter in the city is great and is something unique in RL, there is only one TRUE derby in SL and long may it continue.

The salary cap make it an even playing field (If clubs stick to it) and so no matter how wealthy the board are they can only spend the same amount of money.
All other club dealings or failings have to be down to the individual clubs or board of directors. You cant tar every club with the same brush and say our game looks poorly run.

true but you have to say the scraping of the 50% of turnover cap rule has allowed clubs to spend more then they can afford.

Paranoia central alert, how are the mail anti FC, all they've done is print your match reports and even JK Rowling couldn't put a positive spin on those.

As for Humberside all I've heard from them is positve in relation to FC's squad for next year.

Bottom line is we've had a good couple of years and you've had a crap couple of years. Certain if it turns around we'll be ar5ed off with the media and you'll be delighted.

It's the nature of sport I'm afriad, just look at Phil Brown beginning of last season he was the darling of the press and was on RH, BBC, Sky and in the HDM waxing lyrical everyday, fast forward a couple of years and he's locked himself in his office. It's not bias its just bad news is easier to report than good news.

As for our finances not being in the mail last night, maybe the news broke too late or maybe they dug into it and found it wasn't that big a story. Sure if anything comes of it it will be reported on fully.

slighty wrong.

take for example a side being sponsored by their vice chairmans (and money man) company is that still a level playing field?

i'll say it again clubs should be allowed to spend only 50% of their income and if the club is so well run it has 6m income they should be allowed to spend more than the allocated cap, although not 3 million.

No your right, as I said 'if clubs stick to it'. Unfortunately we hear rumours of these kind of dealings at certain clubs but it will never be uncovered and is near on impossible to police.

The 50 % of their income rule IMO would be a better ruling but whatever the ruling some clubs are better managed than others.

That's the biggest mistake of all. Scrapping the 50% rule has enabled smaller clubs, like the dobbins, to spend money that they clearly can't afford in the hope of "keeping up with the Jones'".

Surley that 50% rule was fundamental to the whole idea of the salary cap ??

Depends whether the cap is there primarily to promote competition or enforce financial prudence. I think they have got the balance about right, tbf.
While I won't pretend to be unconcerned about the long-term financial situation at Rovers, this late submission of accounts has been greeted as if the club had gone into receivership or liquidation, which, at least for now, would seem to be wishful thinking.
On King, I like the idea that he has been 'encouraged to move on.' A euphemism for f' off, off our wage bill - pleeeease!, if ever I saw one.

Were gonna miss you all you know !!

Anyway and back to Paul King, it'd be great if we had a load of injuries and the club had to go grovelling back to him asking him to play and if the last two seasons are anything to go by its a distinct possibilty.

Yeah wouldnt it be great !!!

That'd be one of the best things ever would that.

He never played for the dobbins

Kingy should be laughing ,Now he can sit on his barstool all day without the inconvenience of training or playing. Win situation for both .

Mixed emotions for me:
1. I'm glad that it's finally over - the vain hope every year that he would live up to his promises - but ultimately feeling let down by him year after year. One or two massive games a season is just not good enough.
2. I'm sad that he never quite sorted himself out - I can't help liking a guy who seems love the club as much as I do.

As Jim Bowen would have said "look at what you could have won".

Is that because if we were succesful you would have nothing to moan about?.

And in one post you've summed up everything that makes you a laughing stock on here.

The HDM are one of your sponsors (check your website) also 2 years ago the Mail did an "exclusive" on FC's accounts (front page if my memory serves me well) and not a dickey bird on Rovers present financial state or accounts, even though it's been on the TV news. if that's not biased I don't know what is!!

Well Paranoia or not I am entitled to my opinions and knowing as no doubt you do the personalities involved particularly at Humberside, I feel that the way our finances were dragged through the media a couple of years ago, does not compare favouraby at all. If My club had posted late results three years running and been fined possibly on a multiplie effect because of the previous late submissions and then refused to comment about it, we would have been berated by Burns and Co! as we usually are when things go wrong!
Thats all just my opinon of course!

I think that the local media are keeping a low profile on this story at the moment due to any reports could a serious effect on the club in question.

Clearly any big expose will have a knock on effect and it has become quite clear to most of people that they are in deep. The KR fans are quite rightly playing it down and we would do the same and it must be quite worrying for them.

This will either break or blow over for a while, it will not go away

Not just your opinion, i share that view too.