I've only read the first 5 pages of this thread - so my apologies if someone else has pointed this out but there seems to be some misconseption of what has happened.

Bradford Bulls have not gone bust, Bradford Bulls was simply a trading name of Bradford Bulls Holding Company Ltd - it is Bradford Bulls Holding Company Ltd that have gone bust.

OK Bulls Ltd have essentially (and I haven't seen the full details of the argeement so this is somewhat speculative) bought the rights to the trading name Bradford Bulls.

The Bradford Bulls were formed at the start of Super League, and as such can quite fairly (in the terms of the law - I'll get onto morals later) use previous years attendance and the "clubs" history in a licence application. People "follow" the trading name, and not the holding company.

The debt was with Bradford Bulls Holding Comapny - that has now gone bust so again, it is quite "right" that the debts of that company are not used. The debts were never held by Bradford Bulls (the trading name) they were held by Bradford Bulls Holding Company Ltd, and as such have nothing to do with the new licence application by OK Bulls Ltd.

Morally this may appear somewhat dubious - but this is the exact reason that holding companys exist, like it or not - and it's not only in sport that this happens.

So OK Bulls Ltd has a founding date of 2012 and cannot make any assumptions to the previous Bradford Bulls Holding Comapny Ltd founding date. Bradford Bulls has a founding date of the start of SL (I forget the year, was it 2000?) And can use this, along with the history of the club, they can also quite rightly maintain they they were previously known as Bradford Northern with whatever founding date that was.

It is a case that this means they can have their cake and eat it too - but that is the way the rules of RL are, the rules of Business and and the Law of the Country is.

Is it morally right, maybe not - that is a lot harder to judge.

Actually it might be that there isn't.



It isn't simple though. Simple as that!



Do you not see the contradiction there?



I am a talented athlete from Leeds. Should I aspire to play football for United at Elland Road, yawnion for Carnegie at Headingley, possibly athletics? No, I'm going to put on my clogs & flat cap & play wugerby for t'Parkside at 3s6d a game on t'rec. Your plan is faultless.

But if you took my wages away and the welfare state, I would be in trouble big time!

Wealth backers have always been in sport, even when it was semi pro. The only difference is the size of the wallet of the backers. The Sky money, why would it stop? They have a schedule to fill, unless football is going 24/7 52 weeks a year they need something else to sell their advertising space on.

Should the Bulls stay up, well it depends on what value you measure on. Financially yes,
Morally well maybe not.
Fair play Yes - as they did not finish bottom of the pile.
etc etc

As for P&R should it come back, well either we are a sport or we are not. For me sport is about the onfield. If that holds no weight anymore about the progress of a club, then are we a sport anymore????

bewareshadows "As for P&R should it come back, well either we are a sport or we are not. For me sport is about the onfield. If that holds no weight anymore about the progress of a club, then are we a sport anymore????"---bewareshadows

Are American Football, Baseball, Ice Hockey, Basketball or more relevantly NRL ,sports/sporting leagues or merely businesses?
Personally I would like to see some form of promotion/relegation but have yet to be convinced that any model proposed in our sport would have more advantages than disadvantages. And some of the models proposed would , in my opinion be disastrous to the sport and to the affected clubs whether the promoted side or the relegated team. Essentially the problem is the change between semi professional and full time professional.
In the long term (certainly not in the current economic climate) I'd like to see some analysis of whether a "Conference" style top league (similar to NFL, and the main American sports ) is a possible solution. That would allow expansion as well as giving our traditionally based clubs a way to top league.

Just having a conference system wouldnt address the principle problem, a lack of money both in the lower end of SL and the tiers below it

For licencing to work requires the clubs outside SL to be closing the gap between them and the bottom of SL, that would then put pressure on the lower SL clubs to retain their licence , basically to find the type of rich investors that other sports attracts, those that dont lose out

don't be a pillock !