now now there's no need to be a big meany. Remember I'm a moderator so technically can have you killed. In any case I've gone on record as saying cas are my 2nd team by a country mile. My comment was perhaps aimed at a slightly smaller part of wakefield District.

I'd take the points deduction. Then when/if we stay up the one or two posters who want us dead and buried will whine we got all the referee decisions or we had too strong a squad lol

Much obliged Adeybull, and thanks for the insights. I was looking into the operational rules for the RFL and I can now find no mention of administration or any penalties for financial impropriety, I'm sure there used to quite detailed sections on it. Do you (or anyone else for that matter) know if the RFL have any current codified and published laws/rules for administration? If they now don't exist in the operational rules, which would be convenient for the rfl to take each case on its merits, I would like to know where the people clamoring for points deductions are getting their copy of the rules from (other than precedent). It appears to me we all need to await clarification from the RFL before making rash assumptions that satisfy only our internal need to prove our own point of view.

Have the RFL told the Club one thing and now doing another?? I remember past times when this has happened to the Clubs detriment!! www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/29 ... ford-bulls The RFL understands that the Bradford Bulls have today been taken into, and out of administration. This is a breach of the RFL byelaws and therefore the Board will seek further clarification in the matter before considering the appropriate course of action.

Have the RFL told the Club one thing and now doing another?? I remember past times when this has happened to the Clubs detriment!! www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/29 ... ford-bulls The RFL understands that the Bradford Bulls have today been taken into, and out of administration. This is a breach of the RFL byelaws and therefore the Board will seek further clarification in the matter before considering the appropriate course of action.

Right, [url=http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportbulls/10980461.New_Bradford_Bulls_owners_to_seek_approval_of_deal_from_RFL/here we go.[/url. The clraifications start here.

1 - It was not the directors who appointed the administrator - it was the moneylender, the debenture holder. Were the directors in agreement? Maybe one of us can ask them? But the fact that it was NOT the directors could prove extremely significant for what action the RFL takes.

2 - Blake Solly of the RFL makes it clear that a pounts deduction is NOT mandatory, and the nature and extent of any deduction will depend on the circumstances. Presumably, whether any unfair advantage to the club accrues as a result, e.g. by avoiding paying creditors?

3 - Confirmation that the moneylender's loan was taken out in the period between when OK and the other four stood down, and Moore et al were appointed. In thois period, Whitcu*t was the sole director. Which explains how he was able to commit the club without anyone else knowing about it, seemingly.

4 - Confirmation that the board is aiming to avoid a points dedcution by working with creditors.

5 - Confirmation that the Licence transfer will require RFL approval (shoots down the garbage Wooden Stand posted earlier about the Licence being an asset of the club...)

6 - A considerably less negative tone from the T&A.

7 - OK professes he does not know what is happening.

They often make statements like this, then never follow it up.



Look at the one the RFL made when they found out Huddersfield and Kopout had lied to their faces. They brought out a press release saying they would look at the statements provided, then it all just went away!!

If you don't see why that is still wrong I feel sorry for the other more open minded and less moron like Bulls fans you in part represent.
When a Cas fan and Wakefield fan agree you are over the top with your comment it must be pretty clear.

Anyway, by the looks of things, although the admin move may not be great it sounds like the best move all round.

Although I hope RFL apply the rules appropriately on points deduction, to keep everything fair, I'm glad the Bulls will be playing next season and hope the fans get a good exciting season.

I've added a load of clubs to my not going away list after comments from their fans on the Internet going to save myself a fortunate. I've pretty much got Saints, Warrington and Cas left now and won't be going to London or Catalans due to time constraints/lack of funds.

I don't know what the future holds regarding points deductions, from a Bulls fans view I hope we can avoid the 6 points handed out last time. I suspect with our small squad that handicap would leave us in a pretty big hole to climb out. And a punishment that would seem overly harsh if what has been reported so far turns out to be the truth.

Moving forward I just hope these guys are as good as their word and do finally run the club properly now they have broken away from the mess at OK Bulls.

Thank goodness the action on the field begins again soon.. (Hopefully)

If the rules are not specifically written down, and each admin event is taken case by case, then obviously as a Bradford fan I hope we avoid a points deduction and if all creditors are in agreement with plans put in place then we might have a fair argument.

However, speaking as just a rugby league fan, its been pretty clear that the intentions of the RFL over the past few seasons when dealing with us, wakey, crusaders, london etc, is that a points deduction is there in the case of admin events to deter such events. We have gone into (and out of) admin, again, and no matter what the arrangements put in place I would expect us to get a points deduction. And the fact that it is a relegation year where we will be inconvenienced by such a deduction is no-ones fault but our own and we shouldnt bitch about it.

I think we should take a points deduction, hopefully not the full 6 points, 2 or 4 depending on the level of agreement with creditors, which will complete the "clean slate" (otherwise our already battered reputation might never recover if we are perceived to have got preferential treatment to stay in SL) and then I think with our squad we still have more than a fighting chance of avoiding relegation. If Wakey/Cas/London had been into admin this month, not got a points deduction, and then stayed in SL at our expense by a few points I would consider it grossly unfair. I see no reason why it should be any different because its my club. Just IMHO before I get shot.

I just want us to avoid a points deduction just so I can watch the explosions of self rightious fury

Apparently Mick is doing some work for Al Jazeera, I just hope his lack of activity on here doesn't mean he accepted an offer to fill an unexpected vacancy in Egypt!

So to clarify- London and Salford were not in administration? Because they made arrangements to pay back creditors? So no points deduction? How does that differ from this? As far as I understand, all creditors have been or will be repaid in full apart from OK. Which is a different thing. So a points deduction IMO would be harsh. Unless we all got one.

The whole thing is a total s.ac.k of s.h.it anyway. I hope there are some people out there feeling very ashamed. Doubt it though.

I don't think the statement made anything clear with regards to paying Ok Bulls creditors. It's very unlikely they'd have said anything before speaking to creditors, to avoid painting themselves into a corner, just in case they can negotiate a settlement. ATM there isn't enough information made public to determine who'll get paid what.

new statement from chairman on website

I like these folks in charge now. No players are for sale and the whole squad is ring fenced, its exactly what we want to hear before the big kick off starts.

Would be nice if we could add 2 more forwards, but still this is brill news.

So glad we haven't lost anybody really vital to us.

How utterly arrogant of the Bradford Bulls directors:

a) "we're not going to pay a penny" (to the major creditor) and

b) we're not going to sell ANY of our first team squad.

For a club that's just gone into Administration (again), I can't think of a more clear cut case for a 6 point deduction.

How has all this infighting come about? I thought Omar saved us. How did OKBLTD end up in so much debt and who to? Why was Omar in it to start with? Good will, make a quick dollar, or some other scheme? How have we gone from being safe to almost having no club again, or am I miles out here?

Again, Rubbish.

(You really are getting quite good at this Rubbish business, you know).

Your "Major Creditor" is in fact the former owner of the club. He chose to lend the money to the company, not to buy shares. Although he did not disabuse anyone who assumed he did the latter. His company lost a load of money. He lost his investment. Sh it happens. Same result for him and for everyone else whichever method of "Investment" he had chosen - he loses his money regardless.

Show me an example of where a points deduction has been deemed appropriate just because an owner lost his money, and maybe we can have a sensible discussion?

Provided the normal rugby etc creditors are sorted out, I can't see any reason for a points deduction. After all, we are not the only club to go through some form of financial restructuring of late, and the same applied there? The form of restructuring is irrelevant; the issue is whether a club secures an unfair financial advantage by so-doing. So lets wait and see what they sort out?

As for "we are not going to sell any of our first team squad" being a "clear-cut case" for a points deduction - get over yourself. If the board can maintain the club with no loss to normal creditors, what actions it then takes are irrelevant. If it cannot, then a deduction - which would then be appropriate - would reflect that fact, not subsequent actions.

A few less hissy fits, and a bit more objective reasoning would not go amiss, you know.

Its all in this and other threads mate. You just need to have a good read through.

I kept away from this and other forums for nearly 8 months. There were seveal reasons, but a major one was that I did not want to run the risk of expressing (increasing) financial concerns that might not help the situation.

I thought a club that went into administration got a points deduction automatically just how many to be decided.

Unless the rules have changed ??

Would have thought the only reason to sell players to raise capital or to just get them off our books so we save money, looking at it we are only on a £400k shortfall which will be addressed going through the season so reason for us to sell players is not needed.

OK bulls was put into admin so BB2014 could take over the club as the agreement for the shares fell through, if the RFL met with the new board and it was ratified they must have known this could happen and been through the outcome why all of a sudden has it now turned out to be an issue?
Us going into admin like last time and admin for an hour our so are completely different if it was any other club I would not give a stuff, we didn't even appoint an administrator, as it was all set, if BB2014 had taken over then OK put into admin would they still all be moaning, no just desperate for the bulls to get a pt deduction as it then gives other teams an advantage, I hope we do get one 4pts shouldn't it then we win our opening games and are above wakey and London and whoever else and stay there, then it gives them option to winge that we should have been made to sell Our players.

I think that is still the case. But the deduction COULD be zero points. The new board are clearly hoping to secure that result, but I guess theoir actions will determine if that is practicable and equitable.

The issue, though, is not whether a club goes into administration. That is one of a number of means of dealing with insolvency, but it is ALSO a valid and legitimate way of resolving major disputes e.g. between shareholders. There are other means of dealing with insolvency, including CVAs (where inevitably creditors are offered x% over y period), informal arrangements, and of course liquidation.

The issue the RFL rightly addresses is whether a club receives an unfair financial advantage by going through a process tthat involves loss to its creditors. Whatever that process might be. No loss, no advantage therefore no need for points deduction. It could be argued that 6 points is far too little a loss if you shaft ALL your creditors. My head agrees. My guess is that once the new league structure is in place, we may see a far higher points deduction or even automatic relegation - since they are clearly trying to stop relegation (or promotion, for that matter) resulting in oblivion. I would support that, then.

Then you have the shades of grey in between, if there is some loss but more limited. That seems to be on what the number of points deducted hinges, as far as I can see.

We'll done for clearing up adey, in football don't they have a 24pt deduction for admin, but I do agree, the last time our creditors where left out to dry so 6 pts was fair, but as we are paying the creditors and this was maybe the on.y way for the new guys to take control, also agree if we do get deducted we should gets some money back for this year unfair us being done twice but as one is with the RFL and the other with SLE we are between a rock and a hard place.