the rfl are doing the correct thing in standing there ground, there should be no guarantees like with wakey an widnes. Also I feel the fact that bradford have been able to keep hold of there best players is a bit of a shock especially with the overheads you have.

Yes and we were bought had it been like this saga we wouldnt whats the difference your clutching at issues that dont exist

Nope you adding the important 'all' bit onto what he said. He actually said



you COULD read it as the entire consortium is new to the sport but I dont think it categorically rules out former directors. Think theres definitely an element of spin in the statement.

Not at all. Just disputing the RFLs statement that were in the same situation as wakefield as we plainly aren't.You were bought and allowed to finish the current license period and there was never any doubt that that was the situation you were in. When Glover bought you he knew you were going to be in SL for the 2011 season and would have to apply for your next license along with everyone else. RFL is refusing to tell groups trying to buy us whether we are going to be allowed to complete our license or not.

That's a fair way of putting it, and I think you're right about the "conditional offer" bit, when they really mean those items can't be part of the negotiations as they can't guarantee either. If, however, ABC are saying they can only offer if there is a yes to both, then I suppose it is sort of conditional. "We will make an offer if these two conditions are met". RFL say, "we can't give a yes to either condition". Its wordings and semantics.

Wouldn't you be better off with an O'Connor or Glover who is prepared to build from the Championship, rather than the Death or Glory ABC lot?

Banned from forum

And you know the proposed buyer wanted assurances around the next round of licenses, source please. I expect mr. Guilfoyle wil go back to Football, at least there is a single penalty to apply if he sells the club - in this it is unattractive unless you are a fan purchaser as there might be a license you might be able to apply for, but no set rules, all at the discretion of the RFL

Don't disagree we might be better with an O'Conner or Glover, but being part of the Championship is a condition and they are not allowed!

We don't bloody well HAVE an O'Connor or a Glover.

If we DID we woiuld not be in this mess.

Thought Brian Carney made some very good points about the Crusaders administration situation. Did the RFL have the same restrictions for them...

When Glover took over he had to produce evidence that the funds were there to support a top flight club and a suitable business plan was in place for the 2011 season. If he hadn't done that then the club would have had its superleague licence revoked there and then. Once he did we got the ok to complete the licence. Going by the RFL's statement ABC haven't done this yet so no assurances can be given. If they do maybe that position will change.