“A probationary licence allows us to closely monitor the performance of Bradford Bulls next season ''
Quotes such as that one you mean? Isn't that what they should be doing anyway,closely monitoring clubs performance.What's changed?Is NW saying they haven't previously been monitoring clubs?

"Wild goose to Fat Controller"
"Fat Controller here"

"We have a renegade by the name of GSF"
"Move in, move in, smother".

"Can we delete post, over"?
"Negative Sir"

"Damn. OK, rule change. Engage rule change, over" . . . . .

...and yet the Scottish FA were totally against this. Let's face it, most of the clubs voted to demote Rangers to help themselves, not through any altruistic and "good of the game" motives. Hence Rangers looking at playing cup matches behind closed doors to make sure other clubs don't get a penny as they voted against Rangers.

They turned down some pretty unsubtle bribes, because anybody else would have had to start at the bottom and a system in which some are more equal than others is distinctly whiffy.

They took a principled position, which I think even many Rangers fans acknowledge, while RL took a pragamtic approach. Which was better is arguable and the circumstances aren't identical in any case. Their's was certainly more [iright[/i, and it drew a line under events. The resentment this had bred will bleed on for years, as was the case with all the previous fudges - but worse, because this time it was meant to be different.
So we're left needing a clean slate, a fresh start - all over again.

The quote from Big Nige about the "investment in Bradford is a vote of confidence in Super League" is my favourite piece of RFL spin ever.

Wereyou saying Widnes should have been relegated from Championship to Championship1 when they "cheated" as you call it and went into administration?

If that had been the ruling back then I would have accepted it, not sure on what the administration rules were at the time.

With the amount of bitterness you're showing it's hard to tell the difference.
Your club went through a similar situation to Bradford, yet you're don't call for your own expulsion from SL. That's hypocrisy of the highest order.

Bitterness has nothing to do with it, it is the injustice of the situation that I dislike & how unfair it is to the other clubs aspiring to SL. We were not in SL at the time so that does not stack up. See above being dropped to champ 1. As Starbug points out we were denied the chance of a SL franchise due to going into administration. I await with anticipation for the next round of licensing to see if the Bulls admnistration denies them a SL place.

Cheating? Yes when the Bulls received their grade B licence they covered up their financial woes, that is cheating and very worrying in that the RFL didn't spot it also????

In my opinion I really don't think that the RFL were daft enough to miss the fact that the Bulls were in trouble with money. They knew what the situation was & subsequently bought Odsal. This would mean that both the Bulls & the RFL were in cahoots covering the situation up. That makes the RFL corrupt & the Bulls cheats.

That rule change was voted through by the other SL clubs and has far more to do with self preservation than helping out Crusaders. As it happens Wakefield were the first club to benefit, and the Bulls the second.

Got proof of that have you?


The RFL bought the [ilease[/i to Odsal (not the ground) to recoup money they'd advanced to Bradford and they hadn't paid back. If they wanted to cover up the problems at the Bulls they wouldn't have asked for the money back - one of the things that precipitated the administration.

BTW - having money problems isn't against any rules and neither is there any requirement to make it public.

Yeah. Right. Not a bit. OK. You're not bitter. At all.




IT's neither unjust, and as it doesn't affect a single club aspiring to SL, it can't be unfair to them, now can it?


Which clearly is only because you are bitter. At the next licencing round the Bulls will have to apply with everyone else. There was no mini-licensing round in the end because no aspiring club wanted to self-destruct by bringing forward their application from 2014 to now, and anyone with half a brain can understand why.


Liar. That is just absolute rubbish.


Depending on how you define "in trouble with money", that would be to some degree pretty much every SL club bar probably Leeds. Don't be so dumb as to think the RFL does not know the financial pressures withinthe game. The published accounts of many clubs reveal where they are anyway.


Serious allegations as well as libellous and nonsense. You shouldn't present you own twisted and bitter views as fact. Start with this: WHAT "SITUATION"? The situation as it was then was certainly not the situation at the point when the club went into administration. Or do you think the RFL should employ clairvoyants too?

Cheats? WTF are you on about? In what way has anyone "cheated"? that is really silly.

Too right hey did - there'd only be 4 clubs in SL in the not too distant future! Stings a bit for widnes tho eh?

And do you believe the RFL didn't bend over backwards for Crusaders and artificially inflate their position?

Great "sport" we have eh?

Just to clarify to Widnes fans, this was on another thread called "lucky Bulls" which mysteriously disappeared. It was basically "a so-called Widnes" fans calling the Bulls cheats, i was basically asking the question did he think his club "cheated" when they went into administration?

I've no problem with fans having the opinion we should be chucked out, but don't get this "cheating" argument from. Don't think i have ever heard a team in administration been called cheats?

Im not going to call anyone a cheat. Im also not interested in an argument. I think wackerchemic has used some inflammatory language that may have spoiled his point. Wether we brand it cheating or not, I believe direct comparison between the widnes and Bradford situations is erroneous, simply because both sides ended up in admin does not mean they did so due to the same circumstance. Widnes ended up in admin because Vaughn was a fraudulent Ba@%ard and was both siphoning of cash left right and centre and I believe using the club as a front for other dodgy business transactions involving overseas assets. On the other hand Bradford appear to have simply spent money they dont have, on a squad they couldn't afford, based on cuckoo cash flow projections and the frankly mental belief that selling season tickets for 20 pence made good business sense. Im not saying its cheating, im just saying the two situations are quite different.
I would also add, whilst i dont believe any team has a god given right to remain in superleague, the decision to give Bradford essentially a one year grace is the only viable option.

I would also add that anyone who truly believes the rfls decision to buy the odsal lease was entirely innocent has been smoking too much crack.

Just to clarify to every single Bradford fan on the planet (sarcasm) it was only one Widnes single fan who made any such point on that thread and it's rather interesting that a few posters have jumped on it to steer the issue in a different direction.

One fan making his own opinion does not represent every single damn one of us nor is his opinion unable to be seperated from the team he supports.

This is lazy, tiresome, predictable stupidity. I don't need clarification. Wackerchemic represents himself and only himself and he has a right to his opinion.

One fan. One. Think!

I thought i should mention it in case a Widnes fans thought i was having a pop at their club, as i didn't want it to turn into a Bradford Widnes thread

d.

Artificially inflate their position how?

Crusaders imploded because they had shysters for owners. Twice. Should the RFL have spotted that? Definitely. In the case of the first owner they were specifically warned about him.

And yet they collouded with him, advised him how to circumvent visa regulations, tipped hundreds of thousands of pouds into his club via community grants

So what does that say about our leadership?

Ah, but all that happened before they were in super league so we are supposed to expunge it from their history or just be ignorant of it ever happening.

Remember they finished second in the league that year playing by the same rules and earned their place in super league, regardless of licencing criteria being weighted in their favour!

Should have just put them in super league, been up front and honest about it and not had to introduce the licencing farce we have now. Would have saved all this grief we're getting now

Just to clear this up.

My opinion is just that, not every other Widnes's fans opinion just mine.

As stated above by others my wording of my opinions came across badly.

I personally have nothing against Bradford or their fans, what really gets to me is the RFL.

It's all been said in the posts above about the RFL, they are corrupt for their own ends, the Crusaders debacle, players banned by customs for ?? years before they can set foot on our shores again, the investigation they promised WTF!! it never happened.

Yes I accused the Bulls of cheating, strong words that will get a reaction, perhaps they were the wrong words??

The Bulls did not have the money to do what they did this season & again in my opinion they knew this, but went ahead anyway.

These actions meant that clubs like Widnes, Cas Salford & Wakey could not compete for the signatures of some of the players the Bulls had this season.

Which means what, by spending money the Bulls didn't have they retained or signed players that the clubs that finsihed below this year could have had in their ranks. Am I making a reasonable point here??

Anyway I digress, IMO the Bulls knew where they were with money at the start of SL this season & also knew that if they had cut their cloth to match this that the playoffs were something they couldn't achieve.

It is also my opinion & mine only that the RFL led the Bulls up the garden path (RFL doing what they do best burying their heads in the sand) telling the Bulls don't worry about it we will help you out with money/cover up/hide what's going on/give you a grade B licence etc, after all we can't afford to lose the Bulls cos Sky wouldn't be happy. Then of course when they know you are going into the administration the RFL cover their tracks.

RFL = door handles & if the current incumberents are not moved on then RL will end up as a feeder league to union, just my opinion.

Yes.

[url=http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportbulls/9946617.Bradford_Bulls____Super_League_spot_secured_by_RFL_funding_cut/=#800000First official confirmation of how Bulls' new owners have been punished and the club Hamstrung financially for the sins of the previous owners.[/url

Or, alternatively, a measure to ensure that a club does not gain an unfair advantage by wiping off its debt ? Seems to me that the amount taken from the Bulls roughly equates to the amount of debt written off. You say the Bulls' new owners are being punished but, equally, why should they be allowed to gain an unfair advantage ? This seems to balance things out.

If the cash withheld equates to the amount advanced to the administrator then the new owners have benefited by inheriting a largely intact squad, which would most likely not have been the case had those monies not been advanced. Seems fair enough to me.

That article is all a bit flaky though.

OK, it mentions to £240k to the administrator, but also talks of a sizable chunk, don’t get me wrong that’s a fair few quid, but over two years is not big money in the scheme of things.

So, where has/is the cash the cash gone/going?

Putting my cynical hat on I would guess at the lease buy back, so come the next licence everything is hunky-dory.

whats more interesting is whats going to happen to the withheld funding. If its used to pay the creditors or goes into central rfl coffers then fair enough. If its given to the other SL clubs as extra funding then thats another matter. Could do with RFL clarifying situation.

I agree with the sentiment but the cold hard fact of the matter is that SLE can vote to distribute its revenue in whatever way it sees fit. The Sky money belongs to SLE not the RFL so if there was a majority vote by SLE shareholders to redistribute money among members then there wouldn't be much the RFL could do about it. It shouldn't happen, but it probably will just as in 1997 when Keighley, Hull KR, Workington and Prescot were all stripped of central funding due to being in administration and the money redistributed among SL clubs (guess which club proposed that motion by the way ?).