I think this is exactly where I am with the situation, although I doubt I'll be able to forgive or forget the mess that went on, albeit behind closed doors. RR had a perfect opportunity to either explain why the 12pts deduction was imposed, or hold hands up and say that it was a situation the RFL were unprepared for and that they got it wrong (which is personally what I believe rather than much of the conspiracy theories). In fact he did neither which alienated himself from most in the room.

I am in no doubt the the last paragraph of Bulliac's post is exactly why the new club et al find themselves in a precarious position facing 47 claims as the waters have been muddied and I don't think the acclaimed 10,000 page document will exactly help.

Do the rules say that clubs that are financially mismanaged and require a process of administration are subject to a 12pt deduction... apparently yes.

Do the rules state that any newly formed club should begin in League 1... apparently yes.

So if the 2017 Bradford Bulls are a newly formed club without any ties to the old one, why the points deduction and Championship status?

That is the legal case in a nutshell... I can't see any other way out of this other than a settlement, and its all because of the "very professional board" at the RFL f*cked up in a very big way!!!

Indeed. If the case was watertight "and of no merit" why try and settle?

The RFL know they're in a pickle.

We are where we are as a club. It's a rubbish situation but we can't turn back the clock. We blessed with the RFL as they are too.

I do wonder who's idea it was to invite Rimmer. It was naive to think that it wouldn't end in bloodbath.

Posted by Bullseye on Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:26 pm
Indeed. If the case was watertight "and of no merit" why try and settle?

The judge at the pre hearing did not appear to think the RFL's case was watertight and the claimants case was " without merit".

The Judge's decision doesn't give any clue as to the merits or not of the claim. He ruled against The RFL as their case for dismissal was, in his words, based on "an absurd technicality."

However, Rimmer stating that those who brought it were 'without moral compass' might suggest that he is fully aware as to the strength of their claim.

Very odd choice of words from Rimmer IMO.

I agree we need to draw a line under it and move forward - but the RFL screwed us good and proper and I think we should find a fitting way to let them know its all behind us now.

We could all have the same print put on the back of our shirts; some options but feel free to add your own;

1. RFL WTF?
2. RFL FU
3. FU RFL
4. RFL=JOKE
5. RFL non-professionals (maybe that would be expensive with all those letters)

So where in the rule book does it say that we should be deducted 12 points? Has anyone found the rule yet?

rl6.2 - Dated 2015?rl

yes that's the 12 point deduction that applied to the old club that was liquidated. Now explain why it was applied to new club which applied to join the RFL and was forced to enter in the championship with the points deduction and negligible central funding as opposed to league 1 with no sanctions where it should have entered. RFL wants to claim we're a new club on one hand when it suits them but apply sanctions as if we're the old club on the other hand. Case of having their cake and eating it too ( so suit big Nige down to the ground ).

Mick quoted that question and answered with

I wonder whether Wood and Rimmer have ever been to a Tribunal. I have, many times, and it can be a quite uncomfortable experience.

I find Rimmer's 'moral compass' comment frankly laughable. If an employee has been denied benefits to which his contract entitles him, there is absolutely no immorality in pursuing the employer who has broken the contract. Quite the reverse, in fact. The Tribunal will not concern itself with moral issues , only the legalities will matter.

The claimants will be represented by a barrister, possibly more than one, and the contradictions so apparent in the RFL's case will quickly be used to embarrass and discredit them. The only outcome I can foresee is significant costs and loss of credibility for the sport's governing body. I'd love to watch it, seeing those two squirm and bulls***t under oath would be well worth paying for.

But, assuming they are receiving some kind of legal advice themselves, it seems certain they will avoid this by agreeing a settlement, the terms of which will be confidential. Disappointing, but I can't see it going any other way

On the subject of the court case, I think we can all now clearly see what the argument is. The simple fact that by starting the club in the Championship and on -12 points, it completely contradicts the idea this is a new club/entity. It's hard to see how this won't end in the claimants winning either by settlement or court case. I now just hope from a purely selfish POV that this doesn't cripple the club again and that the RFL or one of the others being sued are the ones that end up paying most of the money out.

Don't forget your own Club are also one of the defendants. Could end up being pretty embarrassing for them too if it does actually get to a tribunal. As the old saying goes caveat emptor.

As the RFL is a member organisation, it could be argued that all 42 clubs are defendants.