If this thread degenerates further into pompous pi55 taking any further I'll be forced to do some work editing and frankly I don't have the time.

In dshort please stay on topic.

So despite that they have known for 3 weeks and could reasonably have expected this for longer (in fact since the Bulls went into admin in late June), they still have no announced process for deciding this and have admitted as much.

"The RFL said its board will make a decision on how it will determine which competition the Bulls will be playing in by the end of this week, but it is not clear when a final decision will be made."
rlhttps://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportbulls/9925200.Bradford_Bulls_ace_Kearney__We_feel_totally_hamstrung/rl

In fact they already have rules for deciding who's in SL, it's called the licensing criteria and the problem wasn't that those are necessarily wrong it's that the Bull's management failed to stick to them and failed financially. If they wanted to announce a mini licensing based on the existing criteria (which is good enough for every other club in SL) then there is no reason they couldn't have done this immediately after ratifying the Bulls RFL membership.

Please don't Bullseye. I was going to put another a troll on ignore but I'm glad I didn't - I'm really enjoying this one, (s)he really is just too funny for words, just like a kelly in a budgie's cage, it gets knocked down and, oh cripes, it just bounces up again!!

And I DID try to warn it that it was likely to get a good 'Varking (which I was looking forward to)...you all saw that I DID try? Hardly our fault if it would not listen?

So have we concluded just why the RFL are dragging this out so long?

probably because in the background they are checking to see if Fev, Fax or Leigh can put together a credible package to bid for a mini licence.....no point having a process if the 3 teams mentioned can't put together a bid. If they can't an SL clubs want a 14 team league then the Bulls are in, if they can then the RFL have at least gone down the route of appearing to make it look like there is a fair process for teams to gain entry to SL before they then decide that the Bulls have the best bid

I explained earlier that the criteria and the assessment used in 2011 did fail. And that those criteria were based on 3 year cycle and the 'new' club was to be promoted from the championship. Now we have a shorter cycle, the assessment of the Bulls finances was potentially flawed and one of the potential SL clubs is a new company. So the 2011 criteria and assessments may not be applicable. If this is so then a different approach is needed and creating it may take several weeks.

I agree with you that this considerable inconvenience and the need to try and create a new assessment system at short notice is primarily the fault of the old Bulls management. Most unfortunate.

i am sure you do look forward to a good varking Anabull. Do your sources tell you that OK Bulls got all their paperwork etc to the RFL by Sept 4th or did it take a tad longer?

I'd guess theres some truth in this.

I still say the licensing criteria isn't wrong but the assessment of the finances has been shown to be wrong in the Bulls case. Nobody else has failed financially and the Bull's haven't failed in the other criteria so it suggests that the rules are actually pretty good.

The 2011 criteria are the criteria every other club in SL are adhering to so why should any 14th club (not just the Bulls) be assessed by stricter criteria?

But the sands have shifted. And the foundations are crumbling. And some of the more astute of those involved know this. Not that you have to be that astute to read the code in various recent statements and relevations.

I think they are still assessing it against the 2011 criteria. Or a revised one where they have corrected the flaws so they know EXACT finances etc. Wasn't it reported not long ago that Halifax made a £20,000 profit. Would they decline to come up if selected because they face potential losses?

That's apparent, so the RFL are playing politics to avoid being tied to a particular outcome in the event any other club sadly goes in to administration. The effect of this is the Bull's are left in limbo and other clubs and players can't plan ahead with any certainty.
Their operational rules are vague enough to be able to deal on a case by case basis without breaking any rules, so there is still no practical reason why they can't deal with the 1 currently in front of them.

Does have the practical effect of appearing to punish us by ensuring we cannot be competitive next year, regardless of what their actual motives are.

Getting the assessment of Bulls finances wrong is a substantial error. There are a couple of clubs just about clinging on.

Not saying the criteria have to be stricter , different. SL looked at things like attendances over 3 years, whether clubs had won the N Rail cup or got to a GF in last 3 years. We have had less than a season of the new licence period. There was nothing in the 2011 criteria re assessing a club that had gone into admin and been taken over. dealing with these new variables is not impossible, it may take time and this works against whatever club gets the green light.