The RFL would allow Wakefield to do the same as they have done with Crusaders. It just so happens that what happened with Crusaders wouldnt really help Wakefield move forward.

Without commenting on the rights or (perceived) wrongs in this case, am I alone in finding it very sad that despite all the lessons of the, past clubs continue to spend money they haven't got in the hope (promise) that funds will be forthcoming in the future.

Particularly given it's the second time in ten years Wakefield have done the same thing, previously being forced to lay off around a dozen of their playing staff when they got stiffed by Pearman.

That's exactly my point, with largely the same folk involved.
It smacks practically of negligence to me or, if not that then, extreme foolhardiness.

Maybe it's just plain incompetence? It would be interesting to know what background, experience and qualifications the key personnel at Wakefield have, I suspect that it falls way short of what would be required to run a profitable business. If I am right and they key personnel are simply willing amateurs, it comes as no great surprise that they are in the position they are.

Like I said earlier, I hope that they can look back on this whole episode as a blip in their long history, but our game is littered with clubs who were once "great"...

Just found this What will my money be spent on?
The money will be used to allow the club to continue to trade within its expected cash flow for the foreseeable future. One of the primary purposes for the majority of this money is to settle an outstanding debt with HMRC.

Why has the date of 31st of January been set?
The HMRC debt needs settling in February.

How many shares are currently issued in the company?
The current total number of shares in the register are 513,067.[/i

With regard to the staff at Belle Vue, isn't the MD Diane Maskill a relative of Ted Richardson? I could be wrong but thought I'd heard that somewhere.

Also I didn't know Belle Vue has changed names yet again! It's now the Rapid Solicitors Stadium

I think the evidence is piling up against the RFL on this one!

HMRC have done a u-turn on Wakefield's agreed payment plan and they are now demanding full payment. This decision has come after the whole Crusaders pre-pack! Also, someone on VT says that Batley had something similar happen to them recently, again following the Crusaders issues. I understand that Wakefield had, to date, met their payment plan!

I assume Wakefield will challenge the HMRC in court and might have that agreed plan re-instated.

So maybe not retribution but they have thrown away the potential good will by securing their own debt and 'assisting' in getting rid of £500k of tax!

Until Leeds and the RFL issue an update then HMRC are still, I understand refusing to do any deal with the RFL on off-shore image rights and pension payments, never mind a similar class action deal that the RU secured!

It could all be coincidence though or they could be other issues in RL we don't yet know about that are making HMRC nervous. The rumour is we currently owe (in back-tax image rights) HMRC a cool £2m and I suspect that Wigan, St Helens, Warrington and others will not be far behind. It might be this and not Wakefield or Crusaders that are HMRC's longer term concern. It would be easy to see the whole of SL owing between £10m to £20m or even more to HMRC in back-tax!

Finally, I get the vibe that Wakefield fans are now ever more inclined to let the club go into administration and start again with a clean slate, because as well the rumour is they are not short of backers circling waiting to come and get a good deal off the administrator! They would probably stay in SL for this season (with a new backer) and then possibly have to take the drop when the news comes out in July. However, with the Newmarket development ever more likely to happen and the majority of investment coming from others, the developer, Wakefield College, Leeds University they would end up in a paid-for SL standard new stadium by the time of the next licence period and you would have to think that some other clubs not too far from here could lose their place to Wakefield in the future!

Correlation does not imply Causation.

so your argument is that the HMRC have reneged on the agreed payment plan with Wakefield (though we havent yet been told what the payment plan was for, what reasons it was agreed, or why having survived two winding up orders from HMRC, having publicly stated that a 'white knight' (thought to be Rodney Walker) has paid off the tax owed) because of petty jealousy that the RFL insisted a completely separate company to the one which Crusaders have now liquidated (and who owed HMRC) agreed to pay back the former companies debt to the RFL before the RFL would work with them again. And also strangely, the RFL's insistence that the new company pay back a specific debt of the old company which they had no legal obligation to do, constitutes 'assistance'.

I dont think they would have taken it that personally.



Its a bit of brinksmanship, and why not, what have the got to lose? If HMRC dont end up doing a deal a fair bit further down the line, something similar if not identical to RU I will eat my hat.

Wakefields problems run much deeper than that. Crusaders and Wakefield arent in analogous situations. As I said before, Wakefields big problem is they are due a few million from the developers for Belle Vue, they go into administration that will more than their debts off, but be a huge loss to Richardson, this is why he is trying to raise the cash through a share issue than simply writing it off. Crusaders had no tangible assets to be stripped of. Wakefield do.

Wakefield will both start and finish this season, of that i can assure you.

To be fair SmokeyTA I think we are almost starting to sing off the same hymn sheet now as I learn a bit more and I agree with much you have posted.

The reports of HMRC tearing up Wakefield's payment because of Crusaders did come from press reports, but that of course doesn't mean anything either!

I think the more I understand about the situation the more I believe that the RFL made a correct decision to protect a large investment that they had in Crusaders and that makes commercial sense. However, I still think that HMRC have been entrenched by the actions of the RFL and have dug there heals in even more because of this. I suspect that HMRC's attitude is born from the fact that the RFL are not just a commercial entity, but also an official national sporting body. Still, it is pure speculation and maybe I was too vociferous initially without having enough information to make that call.

As for HMRC and Leeds test case then I understand that Leeds case is a strong one because of also owning an RU club and being taxed differently within the same business and of course the issue of demonstrating that the foreign players images in RL are bigger than their RU equivalents in the primary operational market of the company... Leeds!

As for Wakefield the yes, I think they will both and start the season and may even get a SL franchise... if the rumours of several wealthy backers looking to pick up the club from the administrators are true!

As I said on the VT, I present Probiz, Castleford, Halifax and the WCC as exhibit no. 1.

Another Winding Up Petition for Wakefield. Hearing is 2nd February 2011. www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... field.html

Another Winding Up Petition for Wakefield. Hearing is 2nd February 2011. www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... field.html

This will not see a court room this time and I suspect Ted and the BOD will call in the Administrators on Monday morning. The fans are voting with their feet and they all accept that Administration is the best way to go, so Ted must know he is no longer going to get the money. As hard as it will be for him to accept, then the sooner he calls them in the better, as I do know that at least 2 if not three people are very, very interested in buying the club from the Administrator.

This means they can get the deal done before the start of the season and Wakefield can continue in SL for this season under new ownership with a 4 point deduction. Also, if rumours are true and the buyer I would rank as being favourite comes in for the club then this guy is in the super rich category and I think this will put Wakefield chances of staying in SL for the next three years in a much better position and I think the RFL might not want to upset this new owner too much! Barnsley in the short term and then a move to Newmarket would still be on the cards with this buyer, who I would suspect make up any shortfall in the Newmarket funding that may be lost in administration on Belle Vue himself. Getting access to new £20m ground for £2m or £3m investment has to be worth it. I still think that this investor would be happy to take the drop for three years and prove himself to the RL if he had to and then a couple of teams in SL might be looking over their shoulders from 2013!

I have done a bit of a 180 deg turn on this and I think that Wakefield's and RL's best chance is this avenue now and the sooner they get on with the better!

Interesting stuff IA. I wonder who the knight on the white steed is....

In all honesty, I think some people get too obsessed with the thought of rich benefactors in our game.

The simple fact is that a well run club with a big supporter base and high merchandise sales, would be far more successful than a club with a rich benefactor and a low supporter basis.

Wakefield could have Bill Gates or Richard Branson owning the club, and the likelyhood is that they still would be a million miles away from competing for a trophy.

The salary cap ensures this to be the case. Hetherington and Caddick are like homeless paupers to the Warrington owner, but which club has recently been run better?

A rich benefactor (allowing spending up to the flat cap) should make an otherwise well run club competitive where it matters most to the fans and any prospective fans - out on the pitch.

Warrington being a reasonably good example of this in practise I'd of thought.