Jungle Out There Banner
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: Salford fined

  1. #1
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    677
    Rep Power
    13

    Default Salford fined

    Salford fined and deducted 3 wins for not fulfilling fixture and not meeting COVID-19 protocols of seven players testing positive. Correct me if Im wrong but how many Wigan players were tested positive when they withdrew from Catalans fixture? Not seven?

  2. #2
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    615
    Rep Power
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg View Post
    Salford fined and deducted 3 wins for not fulfilling fixture and not meeting COVID-19 protocols of seven players testing positive. Correct me if I’m wrong but how many Wigan players were tested positive when they withdrew from Catalans fixture? Not seven?
    Weren’t the 3 wins to do with their CVA in 2013 and not Covid? The fine is a bit of a ridiculous punishment, given their lack of action against Leeds when they refused to travel to Catalan in March.

  3. #3
    Learning All The Songs KentishBarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,087
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    So...Should Salford have been fined?

  4. #4
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    615
    Rep Power
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KentishBarry View Post
    So...Should Salford have been fined?
    Only if Leeds and Catalan where for the games they had to call off.

  5. #5
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Wilts
    Posts
    4,691
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Doees the 15k fine really help anyone or do anything constructive?
    Classic case of pick a fight you can win.
    Last edited by eddiewaringsflatcap; 19th December 2020 at 18:05.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    179
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eddiewaringsflatcap View Post
    Doees the 15k fine really help anyone or do anything constructive?
    Classic case of pick a fight you can win.
    Case of picking on the small kid.

  7. #7
    Learning All The Songs Gerry Mander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Around the Ruck. Winning the Collision.
    Posts
    2,234
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Couple of points.

    Their social media didn't do them any favours bragging about not playing to Warrington.

    Also the snide and calculating way they wrote off debt ,while taking the moral high ground regarding Toronto.

    Leeds and Catalans may or may not deserver a fine but Salford need to look at themselves rather than cry about it.

  8. #8
    In The South Stand Sean Day's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    4,353
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    Deserved IMO. Said at the time its nonsense to suggest they couldnt find a handful of players, even if they had to delve into the amateur leagues or take a championship player or two on a short term loan. If everyone took their approach we wouldnt have finished the season

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    179
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Hang on, I'm confused on this issue. My understanding was the three wins reduction was due to some financial issue from 2013.

  10. #10
    In The West Stand STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    5,038
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Heretic View Post
    Hang on, I'm confused on this issue. My understanding was the three wins reduction was due to some financial issue from 2013.
    It was, there were 2 separate issues on different time lines, they entered a CVA in 2013 which resulted in a 6 pt deduction for the 2020 season, why it took the RFL so long I don't know. The other issue was a player welfare claim resulting in the game forfeit and the fine.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    179
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STIDDY View Post
    It was, there were 2 separate issues on different time lines, they entered a CVA in 2013 which resulted in a 6 pt deduction for the 2020 season, why it took the RFL so long I don't know. The other issue was a player welfare claim resulting in the game forfeit and the fine.
    Thank-you.

    In what sense a player welfare claim? I thought it was that they basically chose not to play because they had a couple of Covid cases. If it is that, I'm in two minds. On the one hand, the unprofessionalism with which they took to social media was an absolute brainfart and had the potential to make the competition look shabby. For that, I think the punishment is fine. On the other hand, if they genuinely had a problem with covid (and in actual fact even if they didn't, because the impression is still the same) it almost puts pressure on teams to play even if they know they shouldn't. I've seen how it's been used in a particular incidence in soccer and this weekend we're seeing how it is being used in the European Rugby (Union) Champions Cup and neither are good. In both instances it essentially puts pressure on teams to play which is a poor attitude at this time and it also takes away a lot of credibility from the competition. They definitely deserved a hoof in the behind over the social media nonsense though.

  12. #12
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk paulscnthorpe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St Helens
    Age
    36
    Posts
    7,825
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    I agree, it's a nominal amount, but no punishment sets a dangerous precedent..

    What if next year the week before Wembley a team playing away decides not to play so they're match fit..

    If they weren't punished, the first argument would be "well you didn't punish Salford last year"

    I'm sure if they could make the playoffs they'd have found a team

  13. #13
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    7,642
    Rep Power
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Heretic View Post
    Thank-you.

    In what sense a player welfare claim? I thought it was that they basically chose not to play because they had a couple of Covid cases. If it is that, I'm in two minds. On the one hand, the unprofessionalism with which they took to social media was an absolute brainfart and had the potential to make the competition look shabby. For that, I think the punishment is fine. On the other hand, if they genuinely had a problem with covid (and in actual fact even if they didn't, because the impression is still the same) it almost puts pressure on teams to play even if they know they shouldn't. I've seen how it's been used in a particular incidence in soccer and this weekend we're seeing how it is being used in the European Rugby (Union) Champions Cup and neither are good. In both instances it essentially puts pressure on teams to play which is a poor attitude at this time and it also takes away a lot of credibility from the competition. They definitely deserved a hoof in the behind over the social media nonsense though.
    I think the player welfare issue (according to Salford) was that they would have had to field some of their academy players. They stated these lads playing against adults was a welfare issue. Funny there were no problems when half of our side V salford were young lads. Having said that Salford do not have the same depth that we have, but if you are playing in a professional sport you play by the rules or pay the price. We turned out a weakened team against Bradford a few years ago and got fined. Were we right to do it? Morally probably not, but the tactic worked and we paid the fine.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    179
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belgian Saint View Post
    I think the player welfare issue (according to Salford) was that they would have had to field some of their academy players. They stated these lads playing against adults was a welfare issue. Funny there were no problems when half of our side V salford were young lads. Having said that Salford do not have the same depth that we have, but if you are playing in a professional sport you play by the rules or pay the price. We turned out a weakened team against Bradford a few years ago and got fined. Were we right to do it? Morally probably not, but the tactic worked and we paid the fine.
    I still think it's a tricky one. In terms of the last SL season it had little or no effect on the competition. On the other hand, you have Scarlets, Lyon and La Rochelle awarded bonus point wins against Toulon, Glasgow and Bath this weekend which not only penalises the latter three and rewards the former trio (for doing nothing) but it also negatively effects the other teams which had nothing to do with this situation. Teams who bear no responsibility could lose out on a quarter final spot because of what Scarlets, Lyon and La Rochelle have been gifted.

  15. #15
    In The West Stand STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    5,038
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Heretic View Post
    Thank-you.

    In what sense a player welfare claim? I thought it was that they basically chose not to play because they had a couple of Covid cases. If it is that, I'm in two minds. On the one hand, the unprofessionalism with which they took to social media was an absolute brainfart and had the potential to make the competition look shabby. For that, I think the punishment is fine. On the other hand, if they genuinely had a problem with covid (and in actual fact even if they didn't, because the impression is still the same) it almost puts pressure on teams to play even if they know they shouldn't. I've seen how it's been used in a particular incidence in soccer and this weekend we're seeing how it is being used in the European Rugby (Union) Champions Cup and neither are good. In both instances it essentially puts pressure on teams to play which is a poor attitude at this time and it also takes away a lot of credibility from the competition. They definitely deserved a hoof in the behind over the social media nonsense though.
    Think they had played 6 games in around 26 days on top of the Covid situation and they had run out of squad players. The likes of Leeds and Catalans were heading that way with the game load but Covid gave them some respite and allowed them not to play games.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    179
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STIDDY View Post
    Think they had played 6 games in around 26 days on top of the Covid situation and they had run out of squad players. The likes of Leeds and Catalans were heading that way with the game load but Covid gave them some respite and allowed them not to play games.
    Thanks.

    I think that's another consideration. 6 games in 26 games is a lot of rugby. Sometimes I think people assume professional athletes are able to just keep going but the recovery time in rugby is far longer than in soccer say. I understand the academy player argument but there's no going away from the fact it's an elevated risk particularly depending on the age and development stages of available players.

  17. #17
    Got A Season Ticket volls_dad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    205
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belgian Saint View Post
    I think the player welfare issue (according to Salford) was that they would have had to field some of their academy players. They stated these lads playing against adults was a welfare issue. Funny there were no problems when half of our side V salford were young lads. Having said that Salford do not have the same depth that we have, but if you are playing in a professional sport you play by the rules or pay the price. We turned out a weakened team against Bradford a few years ago and got fined. Were we right to do it? Morally probably not, but the tactic worked and we paid the fine.
    Did we actually pay the fine (25k???) - I thought that we appealed and produced medical certificates for all the missing players and it all ended up with the fine rescinded? Wasn't this why the requirement to announce teams in advance was introduced?
    Last edited by volls_dad; 20th December 2020 at 08:48. Reason: remembered something

  18. #18
    In The West Stand STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    5,038
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volls_dad View Post
    Did we actually pay the fine (25k???) - I thought that we appealed and produced medical certificates for all the missing players and it all ended up with the fine rescinded? Wasn't this why the requirement to announce teams in advance was introduced?
    No we didn't have to pay it, it was quashed on appeal. We also finished the game with only 12 men, that same no was the same amount of medical certificates issued to the RFL. I don't know if the fine amount of 15k has taken into account Salfords difficult circumstance because based on the 25k initial fine to Saints it could have been a lot more because Salford refused to complete their fixture.

    The situation just shows the big difference in squad depth between Superleague Teams its only Wigoon, Leeds and Saints who can put out weakened teams and stay competitive, for others it's Men against Boys and a potential player welfare risk.

  19. #19
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    446
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Greg View Post
    Salford fined and deducted 3 wins for not fulfilling fixture and not meeting COVID-19 protocols of seven players testing positive. Correct me if Im wrong but how many Wigan players were tested positive when they withdrew from Catalans fixture? Not seven?
    Looking on the Web Warrior site (bored Sunday morning feeling) a Wigan fan is adament we should have been thrown out of the league completely for failing to go to Catalan, I think just possibly, he still might be a trifle upset at losing the Grand Final, I suppose he also thinks that they were the moral victors in that case.

  20. #20
    Learning All The Songs barry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Ashton in Makerfield
    Posts
    1,500
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Woolyback View Post
    Looking on the Web Warrior site (bored Sunday morning feeling) a Wigan fan is adament we should have been thrown out of the league completely for failing to go to Catalan, I think just possibly, he still might be a trifle upset at losing the Grand Final, I suppose he also thinks that they were the moral victors in that case.
    Pretty sure that the RFL cancelled the game didn't they??

    Sent from my SM-A715F using Tapatalk

  21. #21
    In The West Stand STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    5,038
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Woolyback View Post
    Looking on the Web Warrior site (bored Sunday morning feeling) a Wigan fan is adament we should have been thrown out of the league completely for failing to go to Catalan, I think just possibly, he still might be a trifle upset at losing the Grand Final, I suppose he also thinks that they were the moral victors in that case.
    It was the Castleford and Hull KR games that brought the season situation to a head that was on the Monday, next day the Wigoons and Saints failed to announce their 21 man squad usually done at Noon for the next game. The RFL had a meeting on the Monday evening and restructured the rest of the season. At the time most of the the Goons were quite happy to play the one game against the Giants in the new structure to win the LLS.

    If we think in the same manner of the Goons they should have had points deducted for breaking Covid Protocols.

  22. #22
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    7,642
    Rep Power
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by volls_dad View Post
    Did we actually pay the fine (25k???) - I thought that we appealed and produced medical certificates for all the missing players and it all ended up with the fine rescinded? Wasn't this why the requirement to announce teams in advance was introduced?
    Reading Stiddy's post we obviously did not pay it. I remember the medical certificates, but thought the RFL refused to accept them as genuine.

  23. #23
    In The South Stand Webbo Again's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    4,388
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belgian Saint View Post
    Reading Stiddy's post we obviously did not pay it. I remember the medical certificates, but thought the RFL refused to accept them as genuine.

    Whether we paid it or not, it was a spurious decision to fine us in the first place.

    Other clubs had fielded weakened teams the week before Wembley in previous years without punishment. I think there were two factors to this that led to our fine:

    1) We were due to play a bang in form Bratfud at Odsall, and expected to lose in a physical game even with a full team out. If we'd have gone to the bottom-placed club with a weakened team and lost, I think people would just have laughed at us getting egg on our faces and losing two points we'd have expected to win. But to write off a game we were expected to lose and rest our key players had fans hopping mad and the cynical nature of our actions.

    2) It was Bratfud, and Chris Caisley was goldenbollocks to the RFL. And, of course, one of the Yaaarksher Mafia with control over the running of the game. Right from the off, he was throwing tantrums and demanding a heavy fine

    As has been said, we had the fine quashed on appeal - https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...up-559904.html


    It was a waste of time anyway, as the team next week just never got going and lost to the scum
    I f*cking hate wi*an. And rugby yawnion. And Tories. And Brexit f*ckwits.

  24. #24
    Got A Season Ticket volls_dad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    205
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Webbo Again View Post
    Whether we paid it or not, it was a spurious decision to fine us in the first place.

    Other clubs had fielded weakened teams the week before Wembley in previous years without punishment. I think there were two factors to this that led to our fine:

    1) We were due to play a bang in form Bratfud at Odsall, and expected to lose in a physical game even with a full team out. If we'd have gone to the bottom-placed club with a weakened team and lost, I think people would just have laughed at us getting egg on our faces and losing two points we'd have expected to win. But to write off a game we were expected to lose and rest our key players had fans hopping mad and the cynical nature of our actions.

    2) It was Bratfud, and Chris Caisley was goldenbollocks to the RFL. And, of course, one of the Yaaarksher Mafia with control over the running of the game. Right from the off, he was throwing tantrums and demanding a heavy fine

    As has been said, we had the fine quashed on appeal - https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...up-559904.html


    It was a waste of time anyway, as the team next week just never got going and lost to the scum
    I think the main issue was that we (primarily Ian Millward) were making a fuss about playing two of the "big" teams over Easter - having drawn against Wigan on Good Friday. I recall that Basil was very excited in the media about player welfare in general. The following week we walloped Salford in the league. I don't think that the RFL had a leg to stand on when we produced medical certificates - to have discounted them would have been accusing medical staff of some degree of falsification (cough, cough) and they fixed the problem for the future by introducing the early announcement of squads. I can't remember how soon after the Bradford game the Long/Gleeson betting scandal hit the news and whether that might have encouraged the RFL/Bradford to get heavy with us.

  25. #25
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Wilts
    Posts
    4,691
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Webbo Again View Post
    Whether we paid it or not, it was a spurious decision to fine us in the first place.

    Other clubs had fielded weakened teams the week before Wembley in previous years without punishment. I think there were two factors to this that led to our fine:

    1) We were due to play a bang in form Bratfud at Odsall, and expected to lose in a physical game even with a full team out. If we'd have gone to the bottom-placed club with a weakened team and lost, I think people would just have laughed at us getting egg on our faces and losing two points we'd have expected to win. But to write off a game we were expected to lose and rest our key players had fans hopping mad and the cynical nature of our actions.

    2) It was Bratfud, and Chris Caisley was goldenbollocks to the RFL. And, of course, one of the Yaaarksher Mafia with control over the running of the game. Right from the off, he was throwing tantrums and demanding a heavy fine

    As has been said, we had the fine quashed on appeal - https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...up-559904.html


    It was a waste of time anyway, as the team next week just never got going and lost to the scum
    That the RFL ever had the gall to impose that fine beggared belief.

    My view was that two games in three days was an untenable position for top class sport and it was inevitable there would be pushback at some point. It was clear evidence of how poor the leaders were at the bargaining table that SKY had their needs pandered to keep a schedule of live sport over the bank holiday period.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •