Even if you reduce the points deduction for paying off debts,a club still needs to be a left with enough of a points deduction to make it not worth the risk of going into administration in the first place

True.

Which was better...your first or second admin in two years?

I liked the first one. The second lacked bleeding hearts, buckets and medal donations.

LOL

Poll seems pretty damned conclusive.

I have never been put into administration.

Have you ever had somebody take goods off you, then go into administration, meaning they dont have to pay you, only for them to ring you up a few days later requesting you to supply their ' new ' company as if nothing had happened?

Guess what? , it stinks

Yep, got that T shirt.

But that's a point whichjust illustrates that there are different kinds of administrations. We also had one supplier where in the end a company VA was agreed and we ended up being paid in full albeit after maybe 3 years. That's not great but surely anyone would spot the difference?

And then there is another admin, where the business is sold by the administrator, to a purchaser who actually was never previously involved in the running (down) of the business. He may have taken on the name of the business but basically you need to weigh the new proprietors up like you would any new account, because that's what it is, if none of the incompetents who bust the previous company are anything to do with the new one.

Yes, there are different kinds of administrations, just as there are different types of companies, sports companies tend to have their biggest cost being wages, primarily players wages, so there is no easy quick way to alter the financial operation of the club other than to invest heavily or reduce costs , Bradford did neither, but ultimatly there has to be a punishment, unfortunatley for Bradford relegation has returned

Tough, just live with it

would a points penalty have made you feel better or them less likely to do it?


We shouldn't allow prepacks though and anyone involved in an admin should not be allowed back into the game.

What a stupid comment. The thread is specifically on what the points deduction should be. Do you think it should be locked, or that only you have a right to a view?

It is further stupid as whatever the points deduction was or may be, what else can I do BUT "live with it"?

It is yet more stupid as you presumably have heard that an "appeal" is being set up, so that will be when it gets decided whether or not we have to "live with it".

And finally while I have a lot of issues about the methods used by the RFL, including punishing PROPOSED owners on the basis of their PROPOSED business plan, prematurely because those wannabee owners never did actually become owners, they then let the assessed points deduction against them stand. That is illogical, and I refuse to believe any sane person does not see the illogicality.

There should not have to be an appeal. The RFL should have announced that the premature announcement on points would be cancelled in view of the penalised would-be owners walking out, and gone through the self-same assessment process and reached a decision on the basis of the business plan etc of the ACTUAL new owners. Who are now in the bizarre position of "appealing" against a punishment that was not levied against them, and indeed was given at a time when they (BBNL) did not yet even legally exist.

What do the rules say? That's the deduction that should apply. If it's less than 6 the appeal should succeed, if it's 6, not sure how it can.

Are the hissy fits anything to do with relegation this year? As others have said, suck it up and get the points back on the field.

The rules say between 0 and 6.