If someone bought Bradford Bulls and didn't manage to make a go of it they would then be stuck with all employer liabilities.

The TUPE laws may cover this but I'm not too sure how these apply when a company has actally been liquidated as the new company is a totally seperate entity.

I wasn't saying that this is part of a masterplan, just that it is not definitely "The Final Countdown".

If the criteria for kicking a club out of Super League was making rllosses year-on-yearrl then you may need to look a little closer to home!

Quite.

Spot on!

Equally, all the non-playing staff, to the administrator, are just wage burdens at this stage and not assets. As such, you can't sell them, so retaining their employment would be foolish for them personally (so they can look for another job) and for the administrator. If Newco comes in, they can either re-employ them or not. The players however, have a potential asset sale value so it is currently worth keeping them employed until you can establish if indeed anyone is willing to pay money to absolutely guarantee their services as a player (as opposed to taking your chances) and then make any remaining players redundant a short time after.

This is the way it goes!

I hope a Newco is gearing up, it would be a shame for the fans & the RL to see the Bulls die!

There is a precedent at Wakefield. The Richardsons were made redundant by the administrator and not re-employed by the newco. The family then tried to claim against the newco and untimately gave up.

Indeed, which should have prompted a bad mark on Saints' application and a consultation period between the club, the RFL and independent financial experts where they sought confirmed as to how Saints were intending to cope with such losses. I'll bet there are several clubs in the same boat, and doesn't that indicate a major problem?

SL can cope without Bradford, but this is just the tip of the iceberg. The sport is in a complete mess financially, there are too many teams, many of them weak setups, and the sponsorship and TV deals are unacceptable.

I fit was obvious that the books presented were 'not' a true reflection of the clubs financial status, then they should have NOT got a franchise, why are they different to any other club.

You haven't seen the books presented, nor have I, so not sure how this line can be taken?

Fact is if the RFL pulled clubs out of SL on the back of poor finances, we'd have about 3 clubs left. Most clubs live hand to mouth.

I am sure that ones of the world's largest & most respected accountancy practises in the world might have a different assessment! You have no idea what KMPG's report to the RFL said... but I suspect it will have been a fair assessment of the financial risks the Bulls were under!

At the moment Bulls still have players (administrator meeting them tomorrow for his decisions...)

But no coaches, trainers, groundsman/kitman, ticket office people.

So on Sunday, there may still be enough players, but they won't be coached, have no kit, the pitch won't be ready and tickets won't have been sold.

No wonder the RFL's vexed...

the RFL wont be happy as it could make a total farce of the league if the top players are axed and only juniors left. If that happens then surely they cant allow the Bulls to continue as the 8 teams left to play them this year will be facing academy line ups.......

They either finish the season with current squad or their results to date should be expunged to keep credibilty........

....at which point the RFL will probably have said to KPMG "Thanks for that but don't worry about it, we'll vouch for them" or in Aus Speak "She be right, mate".

So Leeds lose 2 extra points compared to the rest ?

Good to see you've finally accepted a key point. 3.60107421875:5