Is that a club doing the beating, or a member?

There is no difference between a club and a member

That’s what my wife says anyway

[size=50(she doesn’t, I don’t have a wife)[/size

I'm sure talk of beating your member skates pretty close to breaking the AUP

Just got back off holiday. Can anyone tell me what I've missed on here?

Jeez you guys cheer me up. Especially the difference between club and member and the passing wind in the front room.
This is why the long winter evenings have seemed to fly by???
It reminded me of a TV game show with Robert Kilroy Silk. The catch phrase being! " You decide if it's Twist or Shaft?"
I would say that may be a question for a Member who is not a Member unless a rotund Lady has sung a robust song, whilst F....ng in the room of course.

Nothing really. But for a brief recap, I would go back and read FAs posts, make a cup of tea first though, oh and you may need a snack.

Nothing apart from the board has a vague wiff of homoerotic undertones from certain quarters.

Time to take the hint from other posters FA, and move on from your conspiracy theory. Section 4.7 has been correctly applied to penalise BBNL irrespective of whatever happened before, and that enables BBNL to appeal against it. If you are still unhappy about it, write to the RFL instead of whinging interminably about these perceived wrongs and spare the other posters a lot of tedium

You are aware, aren't you, that it isn't compulsory to read any particular post?

Pot kettle black.

FA, what did you think when you read this in the TnA article about the appeal?

“The notice of intention to appeal was lodged with the Rugby Football League, by former administrator David Wilson...".

The kite you were flying already had a large hole in it even before I advised you that 4.7 could apply to each of bb2014 and bbnl, and now it seems that the administrator is deemed to be a controlling person of the Club even though not incorporated. the administrator certainly was never an owner, nor was he deducted 6 points.

As you say, you don't have to read every post.

Right, I'm sure I speak for many on here when I say that this discussion is boring as hell. At the moment it's all just conjecture and guess work.

So lets all put it away until the hearing has happened and then pick the bones out of that one?

What he said...

I am getting fed up of this thread but have to respond as Yet again you get it wrong. The administrator did NOT lodge an appeal. OK Bulls Ltd (in administration) lodged the appeal. As it is a company, it can only act by it's duly authorised officers or in this case it's administrator who takes over their duties, but that does not alter the fact that the appeal is by OK Bulls Ltd. Or was, before the new owners, BBNL, made an unprecedented but successful application to take over the appeal.

The administrator is NOT the controlling person of OKBL. He never owns a single share. But he has full power to RUN the company in place of the controlling person/s ie shareholders, out of whose hands the running of the business has been taken. Or maybe you think that the administrator did become a controlling person, if so you need to remind me just when he passed the RFL's fit and proper person test as all new controlling parties must do?

I wonder when this second new director will be announced.

Can he play in the front row?

[url=http://imgur.com/DoOwTv0This says otherwise.[/url

What do you make of rule 4.7 FA ?
Would you care/dare to take us through that again.

Sometimes I have trouble seeing wood for trees.

If you were the tree FA I think the wood would probably eat you.

Why don't you just come on out and scream it.

ITS JUST NOT FAIR AND AINT LEGAL.
4.7 Rule.

I can do what the fek we want.
If we don't like what you done.

GOT IT ?

Still aint fekking fair though is it.
On a positive note....who needs points back.
We only need the cup with money (does the cup give much? Money?)
A win or two will soon have us back from the dead.
3rd bottom is all that matters.
If it was right to give Ok 6 for Hoods indiscretions I'm sure 6 will stay in this case.
It does not matter whose fault you think it is.
Its what those who have seen and been made aware of EVERYTHING that matter.
And news of OK"s personal guarantee for everything at sept 2012 tells me how seriously the RFL were telling him.

The same message went forth to Wakefield last summer.
OK lied

Are you drunk?

No don't drink FA ,

Stand away from the trees Fa.
There is no legal case you cannot even rely on precedent a pretty fundamental tool of justice.

If its happened before we do it like this does not wash.

They can make the cap fit and are not bound by any precedents.

Think I said it once before.
These things are usually sorted over a cup of tea.
Whats happening now independent alleged panel or bent is an exercise of total going through the motions.

But you know..you put a strong case.

But you will need to up your greggs meat and vegggie pasty ( Cornish to me and you when the Cornish ar"nt looking)intake by at least an oven full to compete

And.....

You can take a horse to water,

But a pencil must be lead.

Do you read what you post?

Because honestly, it's just f**kin gibberish.