I dont want to go into the ins and outs of it all but I think the demise of the Bulls can be traced back to the signing of Iestyn Harris and the compo you had to pay. It seems from an outsiders point of view that everything bad has stemmed from there.

Everything bad in the world ever stems from electing Thatcher in 1979. FACT.

So basically it's Leeds' fault that we are in this mess?
I always knew it, bl**dy L**ds.

So is there still a conspiracy to relegate Wakefield?

Well no, its whoever made the decision to sign Harris without fully looking into the contracts and agreements that were already in place.

Some could argue that is when the country changed for the better but lets not go there....

Thank you for that. I was feeling a tad misrepresented but I appreciate you clarifying.



The inaction and appeasement that people perceive to be happening, honestly isn't. I can assure you that PMs fly relentlessly between the mods and the people you may think are being given free reign. I know for a fact that the person you mainly refer to feels quite the opposite and is aggrieved at some of the warnings and bans he has accrued.

Not even an explanation of why you feel the need to verbally abuse and/or try to censor others. Good guy? Aye right.

No doubt I am the un-named "problem poster" you referred to, and, lets be clear on this, I take people like you to task when you act all "superior" to others, think you have the right to criticise everyone else but nobody is allowed to answer back. Sadly, the last time you got offensive it took me quite some time to ensure that you got a friendly message from the mods because one of them seemed unable to want to deal with you. I wonder why this is?

It was only when one fair minded mod interjected that you got a message (I suspect) but, even then, after I had had a warning for pointing out your abuse and frequent AUP breaches, rather than the offender being brought to task earlier on in the piece.

Don't kid yourself. There is more of a chance that "Christians'" rolly eyes comment was more at utter embarrassment of your comment than anything else.

People like you seem to think that it is only people who get your "seal of approval" that can post on here. I reallly have no idea why? Why on earth anyone would want the Adey seal of approval is a mystery to me. Perhaps they would rather have you inside the tent spitting out than outside the tent spitting in?

Anyway, this post will most likely get removed as I am being critical of the uncriticisable. Thankfully, there are more and more people who can see you for what you really are Adey. You can fool some people some of the time.........

Adeybull is a bit pompous and self-aggrandising.

mystic eddie only seems to show up when things go bad just to say "I told you so".

There, done.

Stop bickering like children, no-one cares.

In fairness, I would have needed to warn you beforehand what was going to happen before I could come on to say that "I told you so."

Apart from that, spot on.

2 - Did the RFL work closely with and provide advice to Moore & Co, regarding bringing this about?



3 - Did the RFL work closely with Moore & Co, or at least did they provide active and constructive advice, regarding entering administration?



4 - Were the RFL involved in any way in the setting up of the (ultimately aborted) prepack?



5 - Did the RFL provide advice, input, guidance or indications of likely outcomes to Moore & Co, which they relied on in setting up the prepack?



6 - Did the RFL tell Moore & Co - or at least did they leave them with a clear understanding - that there would be no points deduction for entering administration and immediately exiting through a prepack?



7 - Did the RFL see or request business plans and/or financial projections from Moore & Co prior to administration?



8 - Did Moore & Co propose and intend to repay all the non-Khan creditors, and if so is there demonstrable proof that this was intent not just words?



9 - Did the RFL give Moore & Co full opportunity to present and discuss their business plans, before ruling on the points deduction and the (debilitating) ongoing special measures?



10 - Had the club new players lined up ready to join, whose signings were stymied by the continuing special measures?



11 - Were Moore & Co given any prior indication that special measures could or would continue after the administration?



12 - Did the RFL impose a 6 point penalty not a 4 point penaly because they had determined that NO creditors would actiually be repaid?



Maybe we will get answers in the formal report. I rather doubt it,though. Others may be content to let the matter lie and "move on". Not me. I will not be content until I know the answers to the above questions.



I suspect there are people who know where the bodies are buried, who hitherto have largely kept their own counsel. I would very much invite and urge any such people to now put in the public domain any (further) information that might cast light on anything that has gone on.



I suggest that, only when we know the answers to these questions (and doubtless some others that I have not included) will ANYONE be in any position to judge whether the destruction of the Bulls over recent months has been justified, unavoidable, inevitable, accidental, criminal, or just plain reprehensible?



And who is actually to blame for the destruction, so they can be judged by history accordingly.



'"

I imagine they still think there is, yes.

In fact, they won't like the fact that they are not being hard done to, they will have to find something else to be paranoid about.

Do you have family or friends? Because you don't exactly come across as even remotely possible to talk to.

"What do you want for tea, Dweeb?"
[iWhy? Who said anything about having food in the house? Can you even prove you can cook?[/i

"Pint, Dweeb?"
[iYou must be more specific, there are dozens of pint glasses behind the bar, which one are you talking about?[/i

Adeybull's questions weren't even directed at you, so why take the effort to not not not answer them?

i see even now, LeagueDweeb is trying to bluff his way through. I liked him better when he was 'hacked'.

The problem with all that pointless waffle you've just put up there dweeb, is that you haven't answered any of the questions.

That level of evasion, or answering a question with a question, is the sort of bollox that politicians try when they're talking to Paxman.

If the answer to any of those questions was No - you should just say so.
The fact that you can't/won't say no, is evasion. Which is standard politician fare when they either 1) don't know or 2) know the answer is yes, but are confident that there won't be any evidence of wrongdoing so can brazen it out.