Bradford

I agree with this. Unfortunately the usually 'quick to answer questions' Chairman at wakey is unusually quiet on the matter. I'd really like to hear what he thinks about this and whether he intends to make public the details of the alleged conversation with the RFL where Wakefield were told they would be relegated should they enter administration.

Really?

You aren't looking in the right place then.

He tweeted today that Wakefield will clear their debts in a honest manner - a clear dig at the Bulls ducking their obligations again.

Marian Koukash tweeted in agreement at the suggestion that Odsal should be dumped.

Mr Koukash would say the sky is Blue if it gets Salford the press he wants.

I think we have all learned to take him with a pinch of Salt, only he alone knows what he truely thinks. He says a lot in public just to up the PR of Salford. And so he should, but I take it as seriously as I take anything I read in the Sun.

I haven't seen the tweet but I don't think a tweet in the direction of the Wakefield chairman is quite the press he wants,needs,craves or desires.

However,it does seem that 'HMRC Liabilities' and 'Special Measures' do not apply to Bradford Bulls.

rlWorth Writing Then ?rl

If todays results are anything to go by, Bradford wont need a points deduction to get relegated

I don't know if the following link relates to the Watkins Review and whether or not it has to be ratified by the RFL or the Super League clubs,but 6 points may not be the limit.

rlOctoberrl

12 points penalty would be good.

I think every team but my team should have a 12 point penalty, just because it would be convenient for my team. Bradford should also take over responsibility of paying for my teams players wages as part of the debt agreement, and my team should get first refusal of any player brought through there academy in the next 100 years.

It seems this thread came to agreement, a 4/6 point penalty is appropriate in the circumstance, that should be the end of it, but now people are just fantasising about what else they'd like to inflict upon them.

If the alternative is relegation, then surely even 12 points is preferable?

a 12 point deduction is relegation in all but name

It's not about what's "preferable" - there's no precedent for them to be automatically relegated, so it's about what punishment fits the crime. Past convictions have been spent, so it's similar to the Wakefield situation, so the punishment can be the same as the Wakefield situation, until new evidence comes to light to suggest it was worse than that, then there is no need for a worse punishment, even if said worse punishment is "preferable" to some imaginary worst case scenario.

As PAW points out a few posts earlier, the RFL review said the penalty would be 12 points.

Whether that was actually adopted, who knows, but the 6 point precedence is established and is the minimum Bulls should expect.

I've seen the tweet and there's a a bit of a dig granted. I'm probably jumping the gun in wanting a full and measured statement regarding the conversation with the RFL regarding wakey's potential administration. I just fear that the longer it goes on, the less likely we are to hear one. Also, I suppose it is only fair that we wait and see what if, any, punishment is meted out regarding Bradford.

Quote: dboy "As PAW points out a few posts earlier, the RFL review said the penalty would be 12 points. Whether that was actually adopted, who knows, but the 6 point precedence is established and is the minimum Bulls should expect.'" And the maximum - had the precedent been the maximum that is allowed to be set, it should of started with Wakefield. Example: Internet trolling has the precedent of being punished by being banned from the forum. Instead you should accept life imprisonment, because it's better than execution (and before you say that you can't be jailed for posting on the internet- you can www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25886026 (different circumstance I know but same principle))

Quote: dboy "As PAW points out a few posts earlier, the RFL review said the penalty would be 12 points. Whether that was actually adopted, who knows, but the 6 point precedence is established and is the minimum Bulls should expect.'" And the maximum - had the precedent been the maximum that is allowed to be set, it should of started with Wakefield. Example: Internet trolling has the precedent of being punished by being banned from the forum. Instead you should accept life imprisonment, because it's better than execution (and before you say that you can't be jailed for posting on the internet- you can www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25886026 (different circumstance I know but same principle))