WE are F£$%^KED
good old RFL put owners in place then 2-3 years later they fold and RFL say its not our fault, well i as a lot of others think you are part of the problem.
A BIG part of the problem
Angry,PI$D off, Hurt, demoralised, and all the rest.

Hold on to that anger because it proves you still are emotionally invested. WAY too many of us have tipped over into apathy and I find that quite disturbing. It's certainly a factor that anyone taking over need to keep in mind.

So, if it's all about the land & the lease. Who stands to gain? Council, obviously, as the freeholders. Rfl as the leaseholders. Don't know what covenants are still in play. Bulls are only going to get a few crumbs now, if they're lucky.
When the RFL paid £1.5m for the lease - was that market value, under market value?
I can't find it, but I remember the last time we had a sporting village plan in place (pre-banking crash), It was going to cost about £80m. There was an article (and my memory is hazy) but I think Yorkshire forward were paying £4m, Sport England were in for £2m, there were other grants, Tesco was paying a big chunk and Caiseley was asked how much Bulls were putting in and I think he said the Bulls were putting in the value of the land, as long leaseholders, which was £7m. I know land values dropped a lot after the crash, but £5.5m?
Legally, what the RFL have done, and reported to have done, and is in the public domain, seems fine. But ethically, if they took advantage of a financially distressed member club and relieved them of their last asset for a knock down price, that has always sat poorly with me.

If it were one of the celebrity specials, and say hypothetically with an RL twist, which celebrity do you think would, or even could, impersonate Nigel Wood ?

The go compare bloke

Byrom St.

In the extremely unlikely event that you're not a Fax fan trying to be funny, I'd rather not have a club than have one be run in the pompous and arrogant way you post on here.

Comments:

1) You are right to a certain degree, and doubtless you are referring to Odsal;

2) BMDC - we can deal with them; for the main part we are confident they are on our side. They will benefit politically from a community based project, and a bit of cash.

3) RFL - watch this space, covenant re RL being played at Odsal ran out end May this year. That said we have very good SE contacts/ insiders and that is very helpful re a sustainable way forward.

4) Bulls; crumbs - wrong. We allege that AC et al could have been looking for a substantial share of a full 'Odsal' loaf !.

5) Head lease value - 2012 re-assignment sum was in the order of £1.2M. Currently woefully undervalued at circa £750K. Watch this space re what happens next re lease; can't say any more for legal reasons, and because it's horrendously convoluted.

6) Caisley - largely ancient history.

7) Why did RFL acquire the head lease - land grab allegedly. The future of Odsal and its environs needs to be community based and sports based.

Hope that to some degree helps. Most of the above is already in the public domain. If you have any other reasonable and politely worded questions we will do our best to answer them as openly as possible given the current circumstances and the ever evolving real news, and fake news, stories.

Mick tweeting



Is there a single person on this forum who can trust the RFL with anything to do with this?

The RFLs view of positive news is clearly stratospherically different to mine. Good news, we've appointed a guy who owns 2 restaurants. Good news we've appointed a man who sells beds. Good news we've sold to a shady shyster. Good news a man from New Zealand has begrudgingly agreed to take over. It's all balls.

No it's complete waffle from either Mick or RFL.

It's b0110cks basically isn't it?