I've kept up with this thread from the beginning

, and contributed a few times.
Couple of points.
The sanctions which have been applied to us over the last 2 years are based on rfl rules. Which have been poorly written and leave holes, which are open to interpretation. Solly & Rimmer (at times) give the impression of making it up as they go along - or listening to who/what is applying the best pressure at the time. Which leaves things very difficult when trying to apply hindsight to see if there is any logic in this.
The other problem is to do with OK's appointment. The RFL knew that he wasn't a multimillionaire, knew he couldn't bankroll the club from his own pockets, knew that the administrator hadn't released any players, except for kopczak so we were pretty close to the salary cap. They also knew the length of contracts that players had and that the higher earners mostly had at least another year to go so options reducing wages (by far the main expense) would be limited. They also had halved his central monies allocation.
It has been suggested that the RFL have been concerned about Leagues perception at government level? Also they've alsways said that they're concerned about players welfare/wages and competition integrity.
What did they think would happen when they confirmed his appointment? How did they see the Bulls managing without central funding and with limited ability to reduce the wage bill in that first year? What pressure did (and are) the players union apply re welfare?
Was this 2nd car crash inevitable? Was that planned? or was it just incompetence (naiveity) from all concerned?