Quote: PAC "...
1/3 After speaking to the RFL, the decision the Bull won't get the full Sky money in 2014 isn't 'new news', it was agreed last year.'"
Yes. Which is why a few hours ago I posted "That was the deal".
Quote: PAC "...2/3 The RFL say it was suggested by the Bulls to the other clubs as a concession to ensure the other 13 voted to keep them in Super League. '"
Where do they say that?
What was reported at the time in the T&A was;
Quote: PAC "It is believed Bradford South MP Mr Sutcliffe and Mr Khan, who saved the crisis-torn club from the brink of administration on August 31, were told rival Super League sides were not happy for them to continue playing in the competition unless they gave up part of their share of the annual £1.2 million Sky television distribution cash paid to each club.
The outfit’s former owners, Bradford Bulls Holdings, entered administration on June 26 after running up debts of about £1.5 million, and RFL director of standards and licensing Blake Solly had previously said other clubs would expect the new owners to pay off the “moral debt”.
'"
That suggests pretty much the opposite of your claim. What have you got to back it up?
More recently, Gerry Sutcliffe was reported as saying (again in the T&A)
Quote: PAC "But Sutcliffe revealed his frustration at the manner in which the RFL had dealt with the club’s change of ownership.
He saidnot happy about having to forfeit the television monies but that’s one of the things that kept us in Super League.
“We will be attending a meeting of Super League clubs in Cumbria on November 7-8 and we’ve had the minutes from the last meeting.
“We can see which other clubs were supporting the Bulls and which were not. It's clear there's an opportunity for us to put a wrong right and we will report back after this meeting.”'"
I am assuming that if the Bulls had advanced the idea then under no circumstances would that form of words have been used.
It was reported pre-season on Sky thatHowever, speaking at Bradford's pre-season media day at Odsal, Khan said he was disappointed with the actions of the other 13 clubs in voting to divide Bradford's allocation of around £1m.
...
There were two or three clubs that didn't want that money, they wanted to support the club which was very good of them. But the rest wanted that money.
"It doesn't make sense to me. If that money had gone to make the game bigger it wouldn't have bothered me.
"The conclusion I've come to is 'you take care of yourself'. We're just a club on its own. Every club is on its own but it shouldn't be. They should be working together to grow the game.""'"
What's funny?
