'i dont know but it suits me to think it' Would have been a much shorter way of saying it.

Maybe but apart from not being what he said we're all trying hard not to patronise you.

He pretty much did"[i I don't have the numbers and the detailed knowledge that you so clearly have. I am going purely on instinct but as I said I know what I believe[/i"

For the avoidance of doubt. No im not.

Im saying the situations are different and as such there is no need to assume that the resolutions would need to be the same. Wakefield obviously could and have put together a plan where they can honour their debts and continue to trade. There is no need to assume that had Bradford followed the same plan, we wouldn’t still be in this position, especially considering that the main issue the Admin has resolved is the ownership issue, which no amount of squad cutting would have resolved.

thats ridiculous, even prior to this issue Bradfords squad was thought of as one of those at most risk of relegation, this is now a big expensive team of superstars on massive wages?

The situations are structurally different, but the principle is the same; and whilst I agree that there was no *need* to assume that Bradford could scrap their way out of the situation they once again find themselves in, there was equally no *need* to assume that Wakefield could either; yet on the face of it, one club was deemed expendable enough to take the risk of making that assumption, whilst the other one is apparently to be protected at all costs.

This could go on forever couldn't it?

Are you basing that on the quite possibly entirely fictional threat of relegation? The threat the RFL apparently made but no one can prove?

Just like Smokey, are you saying that the threat was never made and that the Wakefield Chairman was telling lies at a public forum ?

So you are saying that Bradford's squad of the last 2 seasons has been mickey poor and that none of their squad could have been replaced by a cheaper option, really ??

Of course a team that performs less well on the field of play will attract fewer spectators but, unless you are Man City or, maybe even Huddersfield, you have to be able to service the cost of said squad, which Bradford clearly couldn't.

So their choice is 2 fold, cut their cloth according to what they can afford or, gamble further with expensive contracts in the hope that it will all come good









Let's all bow to Smokey, the accountant. We are truly in awe of your knowledge and wisdom

But this is the point I am making about choosing to see a double standard. I think we all agree that the discussions Wakefield and the RFL had were far more detailed than the simple statement which is being used as a stick to beat the bulls with. I have no doubt that the RFL wouldn’t give anywhere near the unequivocal statement being used here, and if they did even come close to giving any kind of firm, never mind hard ‘threat’ of relegation it will have come with a huge amount of information. Information we aren’t privy to in either Wakefields nor Bradfords case.

It may very well be that Wakefield approached the RFL or discussed with the RFL a specific plan of how they were to go into admin and come out, the RFL they say ‘if you do it that way, you will start in C1’ that is the way Michael Carter felt was the only way of entering and exiting Admin for Wakefield, ergo Wakefield go in to Admin they start in C1. Bradford have an entirely different plan of how to go in and come out of Admin which far more acceptable, ergo Bradford go into admin doesn’t mean they start in C1. That’s not a double standard, it simply addressing a situation on its merits.

Over the last two years, Bradford have earned a grand total of 4 more points than Wakefield (1 last year, 3 the year before but Bradford were deducted 6). You are asking us to believe that one of these squads was hugely over-funded, and one cut to the bone. Yet the difference in points earned over 54 matches, with a possible 108 points earned, is a grand total of 4 points.

You are nearly there.
In respect of what each club could afford, both squads (despite their lowly league ranking) were over funded.
Neither club could afford what they were paying out in player contracts and both got to the edge of the proverbial cliff.
One of them jumped and the other, saw sense and came away from the edge.

Btw, what do you think each clubs spending was on player contracts, compared to the rest of SL ?

And we are just back to the naïve assumption that the only reason a club goes bust is it spends too much on players

Smokey can speak for himself. I am saying that I believe the threat was never made and that the chairman may have misunderstood the situation and conveyed that misunderstanding at a public forum.

I sincerely do not believe the chairman of Wakefield has lied at any point. But I genuinely don't believe they were told they would be relegated if they went into administration. However, if the RFL or anyone else can prove otherwise I will happily hold me hand up and apologise.

I do think that no one knows whether the two situations are the same. Without that knowledge it's impossible to say that the principle is the same.

I'll put it as simply as I can. The debt with Wakey may have been principally with HMRC. So a Wakey Admin would be because of this debt (assumption).

Not paying HMRC maybe why the RFL said if you go into admin you will be in C1. Nothing to do with administration, but to do with who the money is owed too.

The RFL have made a special provision on the site, separate to Administration about owing money to HMRC.

The Bulls have said they will work with creditors, which I ASSUME means to pay them apart from OK. So the debt to HMRC (assumption) will be paid.


So where Wakey were looking at 2 principles .
1. Administration
2. not Paying HMRC

Bradford may only be looking at 1.
1. Administration

It's the RFL's tough stance on not paying HMRC that would have lead to bigger trouble for Wakey with there admin.

This is a BIG assumption as I don't know whether either club planned to pay or not pay HMRC. But I do think that not Paying HMRC has more of an effect than not paying other creditors. AS the RFL have made special mention of this specific debt above all others.

Just a little question from me - Did Omar Khan buy the lease for Odsal and if so,who has it now?

[url=http://www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/25743/rfl-to-evaluate-bulls-bidReminder[/url

What does it actually state in the games rules regarding varying types of administration?

Ask the video ref!!!!

Bradford were always going to be in trouble again, it was apparent pretty early on in OK's reign that they had no real idea how a sports club should be run, or how to budget for each season. Anyone who had any dealings with the club during this time will have left with a pretty sour taste in their mouths at just how poorly the club were treating such people as Sponsors, fans and fundraisers. Makes you question just what kind of checks the RFL actualy do with regards to business plans of the member clubs.

With regards to points deduction by way of punishment for entering administration, then i feel thats just and fair. Even if the only person not getting paid is OK then that still leaves the club with unpaid debts and therefore should result in the club recieving a 6 point penalty for the new season ( or 4 points based on how much debt they repay ).

This is based on the way other clubs have been treated in similar circumstances.

Widnes- Points deduction ( and refused entry into SL based on same Administration )
Barrow- Points deduction ( resulting in relegation )
Wakefield- points deduction
Crusaders- Points deduction ( Removed from SL )
Bradford- points deduction

I see no reason for the same rules not to be applied again. The belief that punishing the new owners is not fair is not in any way a good or reasoned argument against a points deduction after administration. Any club that has been run so poorly that they need to take such drastic measures to avoid paying their debts should be punished by the league for those actions. Each time a club does this it weakens the position of every other club associated with the league and sport as it makes the sport look less viable as an option for investing money, Sponsoring etc.

Wakefield fans on here are in some ways rightly up in arms about the way Bradford have gone about this, recruiting expensive players ( i understand the coming and goings down at Odsal better than many ). The argument that Bradford will not sell as many tickets because they didnt sign Carvell on a good wage is absolute rubbish, they are making a strategic choice now to run the same risks again for the coming season. Bradford are still in a tough place, and wasting money on Carvell is not the solution, it just tells me they have not learned their lesson. And gives the middle finger to clubs like Wakefield for trying to do it right.

Bradfords main problem in all this is the fact that over the last few years they have worn out the goodwill of the local comunities, leaving only the hardcore to survive on. Its also still caught up in its past glories, and believes itself to be a bigger club than it is, which is part of the downward spiral that will constantly lead to problems without much luck and great decisions at Boardroom level to counter it. A problem Widnes suffered from for many years, sometimes looking back means we are not spending enough time looking in the right direction, forward.

No right thinking RL supporter would want Bradford to cease to exist, but as a club they must find their level and work hard at living within acceptable budgets its no good spending £1.4M on players if you can only afford £800k. And if you can only afford to spend £800k and thats not enough to stay in SL, then im afraid your at the wrong level and need to aim lower.

Lastly ( i promise ) the RFL is not helping matters here with their murky stadium deal and seeming to be in deeper than any of us would wish with regards to the Bulls. And again here we should not think that the Bulls have done well out of the RFL, as often as not it looks like their help has caused problems for Bradford as opposed to helped. This is the same RFL that does not have the greatest reputation for being transparrent, fair or verry good with anything they do.

Its not nice but fair is fair.

Agree with most but I disagree with the above.
Carvell was signed half way through last year probably on a very big contract. The Bulls have lost players, star players as well as home grown that a lot of time effort and money was spent developing them.

L'estrange, Lulia, Bateman, Whitehead and Langlry were probably the higher earners at our club. Platt wasn't on peanuts. Plus Muprhy and Naughton.

We've brought in Carvell (big earner) Ferguson, Gaskell George and Henry. None of whom apart from maybe Feeguson will be ok as much.

The whole squad were told they could leave when the new directors first started trying to purchase the club, Carvell is still here which suggests no one offered him a deal good enough to convince him to move. We can't just sack him.

A lot of effort was made to cut costs, people lost their jobs, reduced hours, etc

Under the new directors they are businessmen first and foremost and stated straight from the off we need to make £400k. No outlandish statements that the Bulls are back, they have said all along we need to balance the books. Hopefully we can finally move forward and never have a Repeat of this.

They said they needed 400k to balance the books a while back. If they'd kept their powder dry and held back for a couple of days, then they would have only needed to find 100k as they've just been granted 300k EXTRA funding for this year as part of the "acceptance" of the TV deal. Still, the NEW (or is that NEW, NEW, NEW) owners have a nice debt free club, Sky cash in the bank, a decent enough squad, a ground where they pay 2 tenths of SFA in rent and a get out of jail free card that is their tenancy arrangement with the governing body.

Rugby starts soon and we can all get on with predicting scores, slagging of away fan numbers and moaning about Stevo and Wiggy.....but I would like to proffer my sincerest gratitude towards the Bradford Bulls for making this a very enjoyable off season.
Bucket anyone?

Strong rumours that Carvell is coming back to Hull. Maybe the first of a few to leave?

You have his wage left under the cap?

Didn't your coach say you were still trying to sign players, but your up to the cap so it will take players to leave before they can come?

Carvell will be on a wedge, so it's gonna take a good few from hull to leave surely?

If you were a cynic, you could almost convince yourself that the two things were connected.