This feels like digging up a dead thread but an opinion is forcing its way out. Much of the vitriol is down to two things IMO, firstly that Rachel is marketable and secondly the band appear to be the 'creation' of Adrian McNally. A folk Svengali may be an oxymoron but reading between the lines that looks like what we have, someone who's seen an untutored purity in Rachel's voice and has invented a format to accomodate it.
Admittedly its a creaky, impure commodity which is probably what the wider world finds so attractive and enthusiasts compare unfavourably to exemplars. Would the band be popular if Rachel looked like the back end of a bus? No. Would they be crossing over without McNally's single mindedness? Very doubtful, they'd probably be doing a singaround upstairs in a boozer. Are they any good? Certainly.
A lot of this thread reads like the columns in the music press when punk emerged; rock people missing the point and using virtuosity as the only yardstick.

If the band encourage more people to listen or even to play traditional music more power to them. These are just views, I know now't.