yes they have been paid according to statements the club have made. theres mention of other liabilities one of which Ducket has identified as a quarterly VAT payment, and IIRC the image rights bill has been mentioned by someone as another. Bennett clearly says no other long term liabilities which the vat bill is not so presumably neither the image rights bill.

I've had to be audited a number of times by KPMG & PWC. I don't know if they are iffy but you get a couple of frsh faced university graduates who haven't a feckin clue about the process they are auditing.

I bet they had cool hair though.

Err.. yes, they have



I'd therefore suggest you read things thoroughly before commenting on them in future

We may not have too many current debts, but isnt the issue that we've run out of cash and would run up large debts during the rest of the season, if we could obtain credit?

Personally I dont think the club should ask the players to defer wages, unless there's a very real prospect of a cash injection in the very near future. We're not talking about highly paid footballers who could live on their assets for a while. Ethically the club should sell players before asking the squad to defer their wages or take a pay cut.

Ernst Young has an iffy reputation? They're not part of an anti-Hood conspiracy are they? It's many years ago when I had dealings with them but they were very thorough and took no from anyone. www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... wer_Elima/ EGM to be held by 23rd May. Bradford Badger rightly points out there are legal responsibilities to be adhered to but 7 weeks from Caisley's statement to the T and A and over two months from the initial statement? Something tells me spiting the great Satan that is Chris Caisley is much more important than getting any resolution to the situation we are in. And as for those saying Caisley would take us into administration, this is as bad if not worse.

Ernst Young has an iffy reputation? They're not part of an anti-Hood conspiracy are they? It's many years ago when I had dealings with them but they were very thorough and took no from anyone. www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... wer_Elima/ EGM to be held by 23rd May. Bradford Badger rightly points out there are legal responsibilities to be adhered to but 7 weeks from Caisley's statement to the T and A and over two months from the initial statement? Something tells me spiting the great Satan that is Chris Caisley is much more important than getting any resolution to the situation we are in. And as for those saying Caisley would take us into administration, this is as bad if not worse.

Agar is the kingmaker. His 12% decides which of Hood/Caisley gets to be chairman. If in 2 weeks time (please!) the current board announce they have secured the funds to keep us through to next season and beyond - will Agar stay firmly in CC's camp? I would imagine his phone is permanently ringing with calls from both those men at present.

Reading this www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/ru ... -1-4466587 I think someones being disengenuous and very econimical with the truth If they also did similar interviews with Jack Bates and Rowland Agar you would find the hymn sheet similar but not the same

Reading this www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/ru ... -1-4466587 I think someones being disengenuous and very econimical with the truth If they also did similar interviews with Jack Bates and Rowland Agar you would find the hymn sheet similar but not the same

Just in the interest of balance!:

We didnt lose the Harris case, we settled out of court. After Caisley had ceased to be an active board member IIRC.

Built a complex to attract corporate guests and have year round use of the stadium. Should he have predicted the recession and a downturn in income from this?

The club sold the Burgesses and made a pretty hefty sum. Had the agent not greased the wheels,then we wouldnt have sold them and we would have been in this situation sooner.

Still awaiting the outcome of his attack on hood. will hold off judgemnet until we see how things pan out. didnt derail the pledge like some people thought it would though!

appointed Peter Fox

Bought and sold Paul Newlove making a massive sum.

employed Brian Smith, and Peter deakin - Defined Superleague when most folks said it was a non starter.

employed Brian Noble - the most successful coach this club has ever had.

under his leadership won 4 SL titles, 2 CC, and 3 WCC's

23rd May. The twenty-third of May.

It's not necessary to comment on the date. It jumps off the page and does a look-how-far-I-am-from-other-dates dance.

[i"All right... all right... but apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order... what have the Romans done for us"[/i?

substitute your own acheivements and names accordingly depending on if you think the romans/caisley are the good guys or the bad guys...

These allegations are the first insight I've seen on how things were working (or not) on the ground, involving the major players, shareholders etc. 20 consecutive cancelled monthly meetings? You wouldn't be happy.

I'd urge everyone to read the article in todays Yorkshire Post, it is extremely interesting www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/ru ... -1-4466587 Assuming that Coulby isn't just spinning, it seems to indicate that there have been considerable conflicts at board level for years, culminating in the scenario where Hood and Bennett effectively forced out the others. That there hasn't been a single meeting of the Shareholders / Associate Directors in almost 2 years indicates the contempt in which they are held by Hood and Bennett. This 'us and them' situation is obviously hurting us at the present time, and somehow needs to be resolved. The current shareholding situation is entirely untenable in the longer term, yet it is effectively paralysing any attempt for the club to move forward.

I'd urge everyone to read the article in todays Yorkshire Post, it is extremely interesting www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/ru ... -1-4466587 Assuming that Coulby isn't just spinning, it seems to indicate that there have been considerable conflicts at board level for years, culminating in the scenario where Hood and Bennett effectively forced out the others. That there hasn't been a single meeting of the Shareholders / Associate Directors in almost 2 years indicates the contempt in which they are held by Hood and Bennett. This 'us and them' situation is obviously hurting us at the present time, and somehow needs to be resolved. The current shareholding situation is entirely untenable in the longer term, yet it is effectively paralysing any attempt for the club to move forward.

The EGM needs to be called ASAP if the Directors/major shareholders cannot resolve as Adey suggests (on another thread) by sitting round a not very big table and talking. Whilst the article sheads some light on this terrible situation we need the club to come first.