|
 |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 509 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jun 2009 | 16 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jul 2014 | Feb 2014 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Sesquipedalian="Sesquipedalian"FFS!
You're in denial!'"
Nah, Yorkshire...  |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 659 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Mar 2007 | 18 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Feb 2014 | Feb 2014 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Adeybull="Adeybull"No.
You are making statements that you cannot substantiate.'"
Which statement, the one where the last 3 clubs to enter administration were deducted 6pts or the one where I state that a precedent has been set?
On second thoughts, don't bother. . . Bradford haven't really been in Adminstration, they don't have any creditors in fact their still World Club Champions and SL Grand Final winners..wake up fella! |
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 14145 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Dec 2001 | 24 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Aug 2020 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Sesquipedalian="Sesquipedalian"I can quote Wakefield, Crusaders and Bradford as 3 clubs who have all been subject to that sanction and in Wakefields case the subsequent reduction to 4pts
Can you quote me recent cases where a SL team has entered Administration and hasn't been subjected the that sanction.'"
Can you quote me how much of the creditors each one of those clubs' new owners paid off? For Bulls it was zero. How much for the others, please? 1%? 5%? 10%? 50%? We know it was not 100%.
If you think it should be 6pts administration, reduced to 4pts if creditors paid off, what % of creditors should that be? if owner A pays off 1% of the creditors, owner B pays off 10%, and owner C pays 100% off why should owner C receive no additional mitigation for that than diod owner A? If he does NOT receive any mitigation, why the fekk would he pay off more creditors than the bare minimum? indeed, why would he pay any off at ALL? For the sake of 2 points, keep the cash in your pocket and spend it on players!
Why can you not see your logic is false, and makes no sense? |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 509 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jun 2009 | 16 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jul 2014 | Feb 2014 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Sesquipedalian="Sesquipedalian"See my last post!'"
As Adeybull has suggested....you are making claims you cannot substantiate. First you say six points then say well, it could be 4...And you demand the RFL do this without even bothering to find out whether the sanction is appropiate and fair. |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 659 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Mar 2007 | 18 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Feb 2014 | Feb 2014 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Adeybull="Adeybull" indeed, why would he pay any off at ALL? For the sake of 2 points, keep the cash in your pocket and spend it on players!
Why can you not see your logic is false, and makes no sense?'"
You mean the current Bradford model!
As for the false logic that's laughable!
As a matter of interest what penalty do you think is fair for Bradford Bulls insolvency, failure to pay creditors, staff losing their livelihood, players being asked to take pay cuts, bringing the game into disrepute etc... |
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 837 | Wakefield Trinity |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Apr 2006 | 19 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jul 2025 | Jul 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
God just wish the RFL would hurry up and dish out the penalty to the Bulls for going into Admin twice…..
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 659 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Mar 2007 | 18 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Feb 2014 | Feb 2014 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote joedynamo="joedynamo"As Adeybull has suggested....you are making claims you cannot substantiate. First you say six points then say well, it could be 4...And you demand the RFL do this without even bothering to find out whether the sanction is appropiate and fair.'"
Hellooo
Thought you'd left?
I just want the RFL to act with an even hand and treat Bradford Bulls and their insolvency event in the same way they've treated other clubs.
What's to find out?
Bradford went into Administration didn't they, or dd I dream that bit. |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Owner | 523 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Dec 2004 | 21 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Nov 2016 | Nov 2016 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
The current penalty deduction for having an Administration Order issued is 3 wins (ie 6 points in SL and 9 points for Championships' clubs).
Can be mitigated for paying off some creditors. But this is not codified - it's at the subjective discretion of the RFL board**. Would be better if there were a clearly laid down requirement for the future.
www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/j ... nt-penalty :
Bradford received the maximum penalty laid down in the RFL's operational rules. The RFL board of directors exercised some flexibility by docking Wakefield and Crusaders four points when they entered administration on the eve of the 2011 season after taking into account the new owners' willingness to pay off some of the debts to creditors. "We expected a deduction of points by the RFL and of course we accept that penalty," said Bradford's interim chief executive Gary Tasker.
" We are not yet in a position to be able to offer any recompense to our creditors and, as such, a six-point deduction was what we expected. "
**See the attached extract from the RFL's Articles of Association (of which the operational rules are a part)
4.7 In the event of a member ceasing to be a member upon notice from the Company by virtue of Acquisition, Change of Control or Insolvency Event, the Board, at its absolute discretion, shall have the right to readmit the member or admit a new member as a member on any terms as it sees fit, which for the avoidance of doubt, may include financial, administrative and/or sporting sanctions. In the event of membership continuing the Board may determine that membership shall be deemed to continue to subsist as if the member had not ceased to be a member at all. The Board will from time to time set out policy for the exercise of its discretion but is not bound by such policy or precedent decided under such policy or previous policy and the Board shall be entitled to amend any policy with immediate effect. |
|
The current penalty deduction for having an Administration Order issued is 3 wins (ie 6 points in SL and 9 points for Championships' clubs).
Can be mitigated for paying off some creditors. But this is not codified - it's at the subjective discretion of the RFL board**. Would be better if there were a clearly laid down requirement for the future.
www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/j ... nt-penalty :
Bradford received the maximum penalty laid down in the RFL's operational rules. The RFL board of directors exercised some flexibility by docking Wakefield and Crusaders four points when they entered administration on the eve of the 2011 season after taking into account the new owners' willingness to pay off some of the debts to creditors. "We expected a deduction of points by the RFL and of course we accept that penalty," said Bradford's interim chief executive Gary Tasker.
" We are not yet in a position to be able to offer any recompense to our creditors and, as such, a six-point deduction was what we expected. "
**See the attached extract from the RFL's Articles of Association (of which the operational rules are a part)
4.7 In the event of a member ceasing to be a member upon notice from the Company by virtue of Acquisition, Change of Control or Insolvency Event, the Board, at its absolute discretion, shall have the right to readmit the member or admit a new member as a member on any terms as it sees fit, which for the avoidance of doubt, may include financial, administrative and/or sporting sanctions. In the event of membership continuing the Board may determine that membership shall be deemed to continue to subsist as if the member had not ceased to be a member at all. The Board will from time to time set out policy for the exercise of its discretion but is not bound by such policy or precedent decided under such policy or previous policy and the Board shall be entitled to amend any policy with immediate effect. | |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 4035 | Bradford Bulls |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Dec 2006 | 19 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Sep 2024 | Jan 2023 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
except the maximum penalty is no longer laid down in the operational rules. Unless you would care to post the link to prove otherwise? It used to be more specific, its not now.
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 659 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Mar 2007 | 18 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Feb 2014 | Feb 2014 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Quote Wooden Stand="Wooden Stand"The current penalty deduction for having an Administration Order issued is 3 wins (ie 6 points in SL and 9 points for Championships' clubs).
Can be mitigated for paying off some creditors. But this is not codified - it's at the subjective discretion of the RFL board. Would be better if there were a clearly laid down requirement for the future.
www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/j ... nt-penalty :
Bradford received the maximum penalty laid down in the RFL's operational rules. The RFL board of directors exercised some flexibility by docking Wakefield and Crusaders four points when they entered administration on the eve of the 2011 season after taking into account the new owners' willingness to pay off some of the debts to creditors. "We expected a deduction of points by the RFL and of course we accept that penalty," said Bradford's interim chief executive Gary Tasker.
"We are not yet in a position to be able to offer any recompense to our creditors and, as such, a six-point deduction was what we expected. "'"
Wow!
Thanks Wooden Stand! |
|
Quote Wooden Stand="Wooden Stand"The current penalty deduction for having an Administration Order issued is 3 wins (ie 6 points in SL and 9 points for Championships' clubs).
Can be mitigated for paying off some creditors. But this is not codified - it's at the subjective discretion of the RFL board. Would be better if there were a clearly laid down requirement for the future.
www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/j ... nt-penalty :
Bradford received the maximum penalty laid down in the RFL's operational rules. The RFL board of directors exercised some flexibility by docking Wakefield and Crusaders four points when they entered administration on the eve of the 2011 season after taking into account the new owners' willingness to pay off some of the debts to creditors. "We expected a deduction of points by the RFL and of course we accept that penalty," said Bradford's interim chief executive Gary Tasker.
"We are not yet in a position to be able to offer any recompense to our creditors and, as such, a six-point deduction was what we expected. "'"
Wow!
Thanks Wooden Stand! | |
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 14145 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Dec 2001 | 24 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Aug 2020 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Sesquipedalian="Sesquipedalian"You mean the current Bradford model!
As for the false logic that's laughable!
As a matter of interest what penalty do you think is fair for Bradford Bulls insolvency, [iDepends on how many creditors get repaid[/i
failure to pay creditors [iit has yet to be determined which, if any, will not be paid[/i
staff losing their livelihood, [iPlease list the staff to whom you refer? All staff on insolvency were TUPEd over. Staff that had already gone before the insolvency were, in the main, recruited by the previous owner based on fantasy budgets. The club had to cut its cloth according to its yard, as som many of you lot insist it should.
[/i
players being asked to take pay cuts, [iplease state the date this happened, and the %? Do not refer to the request for voluntary deferral before Xmas, since that was a suggestion to mitigate the need for the previous point.[/i
bringing the game into disrepute [iPlease explain how?[/i
etc... [iPlease specify?[/i
'" |
|
|
|
|
|
