TBH it wasn't really a secret was it? Lamb alone kept tweeting his bid was still on the table.

Yawn.

Late night Sam?

It was a late night John, back "at work" now. How much of this can we be bothered with?

Salaries due tomorrow. In theory the administrator could try and sell a few players to get extra time but can't see him getting much at this late stage. What a mess.

I find it strange that if it was Chalmers whose bid was accepted by the RFL that he passed the fit and proper test given his business record. If that's right the fit and proper test doesn't amount to much. Perhaps the RFL should publish what the criteria is?

I know beggars can't be choosers but whoever takes over either now or if the worst happens a phoenix reincarnation after liquidation needs to have the best interests of the club at heart.

The problem since hood has been each new owner has had something to gain..

Khan was not interested in Rugby league at all, and was talked I to it by Sutcliffe imho.
Green was just after his money back and some..
Moore and Co probably wanted the Bulls to do well but had no chance.

No matter what league or where we go from here we need an owner that is willing to invest, actually wants the "Bradford " RL team in whatever guise to succeed.

If we get another shark business man who is not willing to take us forward and just wants odsal.
We are finished anyway.

It may be outrageous but if Caisley or the like was involved at least it would be a statement of intent they want the Bradford Bulls back in Business.

Even given his past with us I'd welcome Caisley back now, at least you know he cares about the club. More than some people of the recent past.

But there is the perennial problem.

There isn't anyone out there who BOTH has the money AND loves the club. That much must surely be apparent from the events over the past few years?

So we either get someone who loves rugby but has no money, or someone with no love for rugby but is interested in Odsal.

Or a combination of the two...
For all koukash's faults he didn't know a thing about RL but had the cash and will to succeed.

If we can get a backer with the will to win and an RL man running it we are half way there.

That's why I mentioned Caisley, if you think he does love the club, started the brand and like it or not took us to the top.

Without as much financial constraints I dare say he could quote easily again.

www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... lks_go_on/

www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... lks_go_on/

Sure I read somewhere the reason was because the deal wasn't good enough for the creditors? Although it may have been in one of those "we're making it up to fill column space" articles.

That's about the only basis it could be turned down, isn't it?

I'm thinking I could be a part time "journalist" for the T&A if all you have to do is type up what you read on forums and twitter and add "...we understand"

This entire episode is just a farce.

I think it was more a case of it's the only explanation that makes sense. There's still too much vagueness about the whole affair. We only know, or rather can be reasonably confident, that Chalmers bid was rejected. We don't know for definite that Chalmers bid was in fact the one that was referred to as the 'sole remaining bid' last week. We only have a few people professing to be in the know to go by.

What I don't understand is how this Leo Group can supposedly have put in a fresh bid yesterday when the official deadline for receiving bids has long since passed?
What is the point of an Administrator stating a deadline for bids if that deadline doesn't infact apply?

The whole process just seems a bit of a mess to me.