Yes it is.
You as a club (like it or not) have shafted everyone in sight over your historic debts so why should you be allowed to use that same history to let you acquire a licence for your NewCo.
Either pay the old debt and use your previous attendances and awards or don't and don't.
Like I said you seem to want your cake and eat it.

You wouldnt would you, but retaining your licence should be decided on your merits, not other clubs failings

The other problem in this is like it or not, what happens to you set a precedence for the future , just what exactly would a club have to do to get its licence revoked, murder?

So when the RFL ask what they forecast attendances to be, NewCo should say what exactly? We have no idea as we can't possibly expect any of the people who come to every home game to continue so doing?

I have no idea what you mean in your first point but in general terms I agree the team with the best proposal should get a licence.

The second point depends on the RFLs motives. If they decide that making an example of the Bulls is more helpful than running SL with the Bulls, then they should revoke the licence. If, however, they believe that having the Bulls in SL is better for the sport, they shouldn't revoke it. It's their call.

It is their call, so they should make it, not put Championship clubs up against the Bulls in a pointless contest to attempt to justify it

This actually is also the point I was making

I'm not sure how what happens to the Bulls involves precedents when no club has previously had their license revoked.

Were it proved a club enaged in murder that probably would raise questions about fit and proper persons at boardroom level, yes. I suggest in such a case the person who is suspected of carrying out the said crime be charged and prosecuted personally, much as I feel should happen in this case, although going into administration is in itself, not a crime. Unlike you I don't see why a long standing, well supported, much loved organisation should be destroyed by the actions of individuals. I agree on the licensing process having failed, on the bizarre decision to lend Peter Hood 700k and the general failures of the RFL.

If Fev, Leigh or Fax were fit to be in SL , or if Super League had 10 clubs of the size of the Bulls there'd be an argument. They're not and they don't.

To be honest the Bulls over spent and if do not pay all their debts should be relegated like any club.Sport should be done fairly and Fax or Leigh should be given a chance.There is a reason for the salary cap so teams do not over spend.Cheap season tickets probably did not help either.Nothing against Bradford but if all debts paid then stay in Superleague.

You still dont seem to be grasping my point

Issue 1 , should the bulls be demoted? ,that is the question, they have brought the game into disrepute, does that disrepute need punishing with a loss of licence? That is the question

Issue 2 , if the Bulls are demoted, then and only then should the question of who replaces them be considered

The 2 issues are totally seperate and should remain so

So yes it is the RFL s call, but it seems they are reluctant to make it, why?

It seems to me that they are essentially going to use the supposed failings of the Championship clubs to make the decision for them , that is wrong

Life isn't fair; get over it. Is it fair that there are clubs with sugar daddies making up the difference because they're living beyond their means?

I could accept a drop to a lower division because ethically that's the right thing to do but it probably isn't going to happen. If you think the RFL is bent, give up watching the game.

They should give a guess.
It should then be classed as 'speculative' which is what did for Fax by all accounts.

But I guess Ok Bulls will be happy to hypocritically point to the historic figures of the OldCo, The same company they were ever so quick to dump.

I already have

He has by all accounts.
Can you guess the major reason why?

Also can someone remind the club that you are now est-2012 just in case they 'forget'.

Look I couldnt care less if they drop down or not, but that decision should NOT be put at the feet of Championship Clubs, it is the RFL/SLE s decision, they should make it irrespective of the quality of the replacements available

The Championship clubs are going to be placed into a contest they cannot win

We can't have it both ways, we can't take over any of the good this club has achieved to the newco, but we can take the bad and punish the new management, players and fans who have nothing to do with the awful running of the club.

Seems an intelligent and well thought out view point. When RL struggles for fans I think the best thing to do would be to cut one of the clubs involved in a large proportion of the highest attended games.

It's not that we deserve to be in super league, it's the fact that the other teams want a 14 team league and nobody else is a viable option for SL.

Were you on the Trinity board spouting this bitter rubbish last year? And if you say no because they paid their debts - the punishment for debt was supposed to be the 6 point dectuction -you can't have it both ways