 |
| 
 |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| First Team Player | 310 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Nov 2020 | 4 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Feb 2025 | Jan 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
I have it on very good authority that Salford had a media day planned for tomorrow but this has now been postponed with no new date given.
No club investment or take over has been announced today (so far) despite this being 'the day' identified by their CEO for it to happen.
SL club owners to meet tomorrow to set out plans for divvying-up the Salford squad.
I have it on nothing more than hearsay that Sneyd was seen at the LSV over last weekend - very revealing if at all true.
Clubs are saying Salford are not responding to offers made for their players.
I sense its all heads in the sand at Salford Central - the club not the train station - and a refusal by the club to accept the enormity of the crisis that is befalling them.
Unless there is a hugely positive announcement from them in the hours remaining tonight I fear that the extra days that they are seeking to get the take-over over the line will not be afforded to them and what increasingly appears to be nothing more than dilly-dallying rather than concrete take over talks will be brought abruptly to an end by decisions made by RL Commercial representatives who now effectively control Salford's purse strings.
The grains of sand appear to be fast running out for something positive to happen for Salford and to save them from their current predicament.
Money is the key and they still have not got any.
| | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| First Team Player | 335 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Apr 2021 | 4 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Feb 2025 | Feb 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
My take is both sides are at fault. Salford for spending more than they can afford is the crux of the problem and they should be penalised as such. The RFL for allowing the situation to drag on. They should have allowed Salford to field their strongest team and punished Salford with a points deduction rather than letting this farce play out in front of the BBC cameras. Unfortunately, we have no strong leadership or common sense in the RFL.
| | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Coach | 2515 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2005 | 20 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Feb 2025 | Feb 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote WYSIWYG2="WYSIWYG2"My take is both sides are at fault. Salford for spending more than they can afford is the crux of the problem and they should be penalised as such. The RFL for allowing the situation to drag on. They should have allowed Salford to field their strongest team and punished Salford with a points deduction rather than letting this farce play out in front of the BBC cameras. Unfortunately, we have no strong leadership or common sense in the RFL.'"
I agree the RFL have handled the whole situation poorly, ever since the request for advanced funds was made. But the team selection made by Rowley was an absolute disgrace. They knew and accepted the salary cap conditions as part of receiving the advance, and what that reduced cap does is stop Salford from fielding a team that is funded by an advance not available to other clubs.
To not pick the first teamers they could pick was bad enough. To only go with 3 subs is dreadful. There should be some punishment dished out for this, and given their willingness to throw these kids into impossible situations, I'd be asking serious questions about whether they should be allowed and elite academy license. They ought to be put on notice that they will revoke that if they pull such a stunt again. | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Fringe Player | 232 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jul 2022 | 3 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Mar 2025 | Feb 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
What I can’t get my head around, is why img didn’t spot any issues around there finances when they were doing there gradings. As for Rowley saying about players meeting each other for the first time, total .
| | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Star | 3417 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jul 2015 | 10 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Feb 2025 | Feb 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Narked RAMBLE ALERT!
Quote satanicmills="satanicmills"nonsense the result on thursday got biggest coverage friday than rl has had for yonks our first win in wiggin for 40 years plus might also stick in the mind
salford had far too much space on this forum'"
Were Bongser to have his thoughts “dissed” by the real ee cummings, he would indeed be flattered (if a little alarmed, as said gent has been dead for 62 years), but he accepts no pale imitations! “Diss-missed!”
Bongser spoke of the collective mind, not yours. As B got into work today, the cleaner, Brian (Manc, works Sunday to Thursday) spoke not about Wigan 0-1 Leigh, but about the farce with Saints.
Derek has been very supportive of Salford in their inpecunity (see his posts/tweets passim), but he seems well dischuffed with Rowley’s shenanigans:
https://www.seriousaboutrl.com/derek-be ... ed-stories
The RFL also seems less than impressed:
https://www.totalrl.com/rfl-launch-inve ... ens-clash/
Though, with the RFL as ever moving slower than an iceberg (will there be any icebergs left by the time they act? And, no, Bongser is not talking about lettuces (or Liz Truss)) will anything meaningful happen. They’ve given Salford a week to respond. Why a week in this “instant” day & age?
Postpone any ratification of the new ownership until a response is forthcoming; keep the sanctions in place; and if Rowls (to borrow a cudgel from Leythig) pulls the same stunt again versus Leeds on Saturday, come down hard!
satanic mills, Bongser presumes that you derive your name from William Blake, He also wrote, “There is a grain of sand in Lambeth that Satan cannot find.”
Is there a grain of integrity in Mr Integrity? Will he hold up his hands, admit that he behaved deplorably, apologise and accept the consequences? Or will he come out all-guns-blazing like Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid?
If the latter, Bongser can only see a picture of Paul Rowley fade into sepia to a Bacharach soundtrack concerning raindrops and a dikk-ead!
Rant over!
For now…..
Annoyed of Atherton (name & address supplied). |
|
Narked RAMBLE ALERT!
Quote satanicmills="satanicmills"nonsense the result on thursday got biggest coverage friday than rl has had for yonks our first win in wiggin for 40 years plus might also stick in the mind
salford had far too much space on this forum'"
Were Bongser to have his thoughts “dissed” by the real ee cummings, he would indeed be flattered (if a little alarmed, as said gent has been dead for 62 years), but he accepts no pale imitations! “Diss-missed!”
Bongser spoke of the collective mind, not yours. As B got into work today, the cleaner, Brian (Manc, works Sunday to Thursday) spoke not about Wigan 0-1 Leigh, but about the farce with Saints.
Derek has been very supportive of Salford in their inpecunity (see his posts/tweets passim), but he seems well dischuffed with Rowley’s shenanigans:
https://www.seriousaboutrl.com/derek-be ... ed-stories
The RFL also seems less than impressed:
https://www.totalrl.com/rfl-launch-inve ... ens-clash/
Though, with the RFL as ever moving slower than an iceberg (will there be any icebergs left by the time they act? And, no, Bongser is not talking about lettuces (or Liz Truss)) will anything meaningful happen. They’ve given Salford a week to respond. Why a week in this “instant” day & age?
Postpone any ratification of the new ownership until a response is forthcoming; keep the sanctions in place; and if Rowls (to borrow a cudgel from Leythig) pulls the same stunt again versus Leeds on Saturday, come down hard!
satanic mills, Bongser presumes that you derive your name from William Blake, He also wrote, “There is a grain of sand in Lambeth that Satan cannot find.”
Is there a grain of integrity in Mr Integrity? Will he hold up his hands, admit that he behaved deplorably, apologise and accept the consequences? Or will he come out all-guns-blazing like Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid?
If the latter, Bongser can only see a picture of Paul Rowley fade into sepia to a Bacharach soundtrack concerning raindrops and a dikk-ead!
Rant over!
For now…..
Annoyed of Atherton (name & address supplied). | |
|
| | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| First Team Player | 667 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Nov 2020 | 4 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Mar 2025 | Feb 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| ChatGPT to the rescue - "Non-payment of wages to a sportsperson may not automatically render the contract null and void, but it can provide grounds for termination or legal action, depending on the terms of the contract and the applicable laws or regulations. Here’s how it typically works: Contract Terms: The contract itself will often outline the consequences of non-payment. If there is a clause stating that non-payment is a material breach, the sportsperson may be entitled to terminate the contract. Material Breach: In many jurisdictions, non-payment of wages is considered a material breach of contract, especially if the payments are a significant part of the contract's obligations. Right to Terminate: If the non-payment constitutes a material breach, the sportsperson can issue a formal notice of breach to the employer, giving them a certain period to remedy the situation (often referred to as a "grace period"). Governing Regulations: Certain sports are governed by specific regulations (like FIFA Regulations for football players or player union agreements). These regulations often provide mechanisms for resolving wage disputes and may allow contract termination if wages are not paid within a certain period. Legal Action & Damages: The sportsperson may also pursue legal action for breach of contract to recover unpaid wages and potentially claim additional damages. Null and Void vs. Termination: - "Null and Void" typically means the contract was never valid from the start — which is rare in wage disputes.
- Termination means the contract was valid but is ended due to breach.
Conclusion:Non-payment of wages does not automatically void a contract but is likely to provide grounds for termination and legal action. The specific outcome depends on the contract terms, the governing regulations, and the laws in the relevant jurisdiction." | | | |
| |
All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.
Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.
RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.
Copyright 1999 - 2025 RLFANS.COM
You must be 18+ to gamble, for more information and for help with gambling issues see https://www.begambleaware.org/.
Please Support RLFANS.COM
13.87255859375
|
|
