Clear nonsense. If ABC had come in and paid off all the debts and bought th club lock stock, then we would have continued on, and been in SL for the foreseeable. You know this, so why make up stuff? The Bulls' ongoing status as a SL club - so far as the RFL is concerned - will NOT BE CONSIDERED unless and until there is a buyer, and that buyer puts all their cards and details on the RFL table. To say that whatever bid came in, the decision has already been made to reject it, is, with respect, conspiracy nonsense.


I have said a few times that the procedures and timescales make me believe personally the SL boat has already sailed, though in the unlikley event of a big money bidder doing the business very quickly you never know. But your remark is another [inon sequitur[/i. SLE/RFL - put it whichever way you will - are not "encouraging" players to find other clubs, they seem to me to simply be being fair, since you (presumably) understand why the new owners SLE(E)Ltd cannot and will not sign or re-sign a single player? If not, read my earlier posts where I've explained it.


Interesting straw man, where did I or anyone claim that either of them made such a statement?

Haved I hit a raw nerve somewhere...?

I do NOT use the term "sugar daddies" in any disparaging way. It is merely a fact of life that at least ten (you forgot Pearson and O'Connor, but probably unfairly included Caddick now) of the SL clubs have been reliant on the largesse of their wealthy owner/investor in recent times.

And referring to others as friends is not the same as saying they would necesarily support the Bulls continuing tenure in SL. I would expect it would depend very much on the circumstances.

Which is why I keep saying that unless someone takes on the club pretty well "as is" - maybe with some allowance given to the damage that has been done as a result of the administration, and what would be involved to repair that - I cannot see the club remaining in SL, or surviving.

And I repeat the question - IF those things result in Salford's financial demise then can we expect SLE to bail us out?

And to answer your question - just look at Karl Harrison's record before the sacking - started well and went rapidly downhill, the Barton move I agree, the lack of marketing effort to attempt to galvanise the Greater Manchester public has been pitiful - but I would stress pitiful rather than downright incompetant - who did the due diligence on the Harris deal?, who examined the potetential effect of the sale of the lease?, who did the cash flow forecast on the season ticket pricing?

And I repeat - why the hell are you asking us?

That is a question you should address to the 13 SL chairmen or representatives who we are told unanimously approved teh decision.

And had they not taken that decsion, they would have been faced with the Bulls exiting SL stage left at very short order, and the structure and integrity of the competition for this year being wrecked.

I don't think Bulls have been bailed out. They'll likely finish the season now but beyond that... ?

Leaving aside the fact that in no sense have the Bulls been "bailed out", obviously not, as unlike us, you're a little club, which they would be glad to see the back of.

indeed the SL boat may well have truely sailed. Agreed. Little wonder the SL clubs did not want such a flawed organisation in SL in 2013. And given that the RFL share your view of the future they will encourage players to find other clubs. Which is where I started.

The Bulls in the Championship [ not Championship 1 ] could expect average gates of around 3/4,000 , that would allow them to pay a reduced rental to the RFL , drop to Championship 1 , and it all then falls apart

But the logistics of it mean exactly that. At the end of the month the (best of) the players will be gone (and I don't blame them) along with the already (technically) gone coaching staff, whilst we can sign no-one (not that many would come, I know) so where is our SL team and coaching staff to come from?

Even with a new owner there will only be the sick, lame and lazy left to recruit after everyone else has signed the ones they want. Yeah OK , maybe I exaggerate a bit but we'd be in exactly the sort of position that the RFL stopped P&R and started licensing to avoid; teams coming into SL without being able to recruit properly and then getting stuffed every week.

Jeez, there's no-one hopes I'm wrong more than me but I can't see beyond us being lined up for division 2.

Exactly. The extent to which the wrong end of the stick has be grabbed seems to be killing any meaningful discussion.

Bradford would/will have a bit more time with, effectively, a different administrator. And if a buyer can't be found, the prospect (hopefully) of a softer landing.

I think a fine line is being walked pretty well, frankly.

Without new ownership, I think that is pretty much inevitable.

I'm not going to sugar-coat it, but it is something to start from - debt-free and with some basic infrastructure in place.

Spot on , you had what was it , 6/7 weeks to find a new owner ? , game over now , the RFL will be actively seeking your replacements in the remaining weeks till the end of the season , expect Mick potter and the aussies to be wearing Olympic Bleau next year