The £400k shortfall was announced in November, at a fans forum.

I gather they either did not know about this loan then, or DID but did not include it.

And as for your point re backroom staff cuts...preaching to the choir there mate.

Moor et al walked away in December because they could not get an agreement with OK.

Bradford will still have one or two high-earners under previous contracts. You can't just sack them.

It WAS reported that they asked players and other senior staff to take a10% pay cut, deferred not permanent, to avoid reducndancies. Seems the players declined.

The paradox here, which IMO has no real satisfactory resolution, is the conflict between the need to 'punish' by way of deterrent, and the obvious problem of 'kicking a club while its down'. The RFL would no doubt like to see Bradford recover, but points deduction doesn't help that process. (That said, if there's rules in place they ought to be stuck to). Likewise, if we're being honest, does OK now particularly give a monkey's whether or not the 'new' Bradford loses points? Unlikely, what does it matter to him now? Therefore a points deduction doesn't 'punish' him.

As others have said, the only fair place to apply sanctions is on the individuals responsible. I'd like to see all Directors and Senior Managers of clubs put into administration face a minimum 5 year ban from involvement in the game, with extended bans for aggravating circumstances. No doubt this will prove a little too blunt on occassion, perhaps unfairly punishing the odd person who, say, didn't do much wrong, but it's a reasonable course of action IMO for a situation which has no perfect solution.

I thought they walked away because "new debts were discover which they weren't informed about by the previous administration" - I guess it's all a bit academic in that regardless of when it came to light it all still needs paying!

As for sacking the , I'm sure if you really looked hard you'd find those willing to take on the contracts, but further than that, I would say that carvell is definitely going to be in your top 5 earners next year, in all likelihood, and that contract didn't need to be taken on.

As regard the above post about punishing an administration that no longer contains the perpetrators: all clubs have accepted responsibilities of their players coaches and fans, as well as their directors and owners (it's in the rfl operational rules) - the club could of ceased trading and reopened in the amateur leagues to be rebuilt, instead it took on liability of those who saved it. Unfortunate for the fans, but when you look at the alternates, you take that risk!

As for banning ok from the sport ... I doubt very much he'd get anywhere near another club. Even if he tried, I'd be surprised if he passed the fit and proper persons test again. And ultimately, I'm not convinced he'd care any more than a points reduction if he were banned.

Rights chaps, [url=http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportbulls/10980461.New_Bradford_Bulls_owners_to_seek_approval_of_deal_from_RFL/a bit of bedtime reading for night owls.[/url.

May start to answer a few of your questions.

Note in particular, it was not the directors put the club into administration. It was the moneylender. And that the laon was taken ouyt in teh period when Whitcu*t was the sole director, after OK and the other four stood down and before Moore et al were appointed.

[url www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... _from_RFL/ [/url Quote “The transfer of both the Super League and RFL membership from OK Bulls to the new company is subject to RFL approval. “The points deduction is more difficult because until we see the proposals from the directors, we won’t know if a points deduction is appropriate and how many points that might be.”'" So, much yet to be decided... The final straw for me would be if after winning their first 3 fixtures with the current squad, which completely coincidentally are against their 3 main relegation rivals, Castleford, Wakefield and London, they decide that actually they do need to cut the players budget and sell off a few stars. Compound that with no points deduction from the RFL and they're well on their way to SL survival.

[url www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... _from_RFL/ [/url Quote “The transfer of both the Super League and RFL membership from OK Bulls to the new company is subject to RFL approval. “The points deduction is more difficult because until we see the proposals from the directors, we won’t know if a points deduction is appropriate and how many points that might be.”'" So, much yet to be decided... The final straw for me would be if after winning their first 3 fixtures with the current squad, which completely coincidentally are against their 3 main relegation rivals, Castleford, Wakefield and London, they decide that actually they do need to cut the players budget and sell off a few stars. Compound that with no points deduction from the RFL and they're well on their way to SL survival.

The T&A article makes it clear in my mind that the loan to the security firm was not being repaid. Otherwise, why would they push the Ltd co into Admin?

I also find it hard to believe that the new directors were 'unaware' of this loan. It included a debenture and was registered with companies house on 30th September. But more blatantly obvious would be the money entering the Bulls account on their bank statement and the question every new owner would have: 'How did we pay the wages last month?'

To say is no continuity within the directors during that time is wrong. When Robbie Hunter Paul was appointed CEO on 26th September, Moore and Whitcut were already running the club. This was before the debenture was taken out. If they have chosen not to mention this at the Fans Forum then that's their choice.

The Bulls board have failed to pay HMRC and keep to the terms of the loan from this security company, they have attempted to hide this from their fans by failing to be upfront about it when clearly this loan was for wages, they have broken operational rules of the RFL by not paying and so should suffer the same fate as everyone else - the rule is there to prevent teams gaining an unfair advantage by reneging on debts and dragging the name of the sport down.

All that is without thinking about Omar Khan and his loans/shares etc. He will chase the new company for payment as the asset (the rugby club) has transferred over therefore his argument will be that his charge transferred with it. I can foresee that he will take it to the courts as he appears to be is only in it for himself.

The situation at the Bulls is getting messier and it's going to be messy for some time. They need to get out of the other side of this agreement OK made to take a 50% reduction in Sky money as that will help. But will they be out of Superleague I by then?

I can't wait for the Fax v Bulls derby games to be a regular fixture! It's gonna be sooner rather than later.

Relegation seems to be looming for the Dulls

The statement put on and then subsequently taken off the Bulls website which states that they won't get a points deduction seems to suggest that it surely is a done deal. Conspiracy theorists will have a field day that Bradford simply jumped the gun, and didn't stick to their part of the script that has been concocted with the RFL by announcing this early?

I genuinely wouldn't be surprised if all of this was decided with the RFL's help simply to save face, and this is all be acted out as a way to give the whole thing credibility. Unfortunately, it seems the Bulls press department is as inept as their accounts.

I feel for the Bradford fans who've had to tolerate this circus for the past few years.

"All the world's a stage..."

Absolutely spot on.

It certainly is, and RL comes under which ' genre ' ?

If this turns out to be a 'no choice option' to resolve the ownership and all debts are paid off ( other than OK as we all accept he is trying it on with his investment suddenly becoming a loan) and has been done with the cooperation of the RFL then there should be no sanction.

But if that's the case the OKBulls would have put themselves into admin not the security firm as reported.

For me the scenario I think that would keep most fans satisfied, not letting a club off scot free but not kicking them while they are down would be 6 points deduction, but full allocation of sky money THIS season. A transfer embargo on the bulls so it goes on paying debts rather than playing squad. Thoughts?

The Cougars are ready and able to take over the "Bradford Licence"

Thats a far too sensible idea.
I never understood the logic of financially penalising a club that is already struggling financially?!

I reluctantly agree with that. It's simply not credible to add a points deduction on top of getting only half the money. I don't care who the club is, that form of double kicking goes way above and beyond.

There needs to be some form of points penalty for going into administration even if it is only 4 points otherwise the game will be brought into disrepute.

[url=http://www.bradfordbulls.co.uk/news/article/8859/chairman-squad-is-ring-fenced?BULLS FIRST TEAM SQUAD NOW RING-FENCED. NO-ONE IS FOR SALE.[/url

Oh, and as an afterthought.....

[url=http://www.bradfordbulls.co.uk/news/article/8859/chairman-squad-is-ring-fenced?... sincere apologies to all Super League stakeholders for yesterday’s story, regarding the Bulls starting the new season on zero points, which was posted onto the club's official website. [i"I made my first mistake, by having a misunderstanding of the due process needed to guarantee starting the Super League [uequally[/u with all other clubs"[/i[/url

Were the playing squads of Wakefield and London equally ring-fenced and not for sale?

I know he's such a sinister character apologising like that and then going on to explain it in full. What a dodgy boiler.

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.

Ha ha ha

I'm not overly bothered about the amount of points deducted. But there should be a points deduction for going into admin. It's part of the rules.

As for punishing the new owners. It's not really about that, it's about redressing the balance for the club buying players on finances that they could not afford.

Whilst the owners lose their money through loans or capital that is invested. A points deduction is the only way to apply that punishment to the club itself, which remains as it was days ago, except under new ownership.

We never went into administration.

with P&R back not deducting the bulls could set a dangerous precedent. Teams will go back to going bust to stay up

We never went into administration.

It might be a good return for the rfl but its real cheap rent for the bulls