There, that's more like it

So whats the problem ?, this happens to 1,000s of clubs in all sports all the time

as was explained, it was a negative thing that happened to the bulls that was a factor, along with many other factors, that resulted in their problems.

Before you do your usual bat nonsense. Nobody has said it was the only factor, nobody said was a major factor, nobody said it was the deciding factor, simply that it was one factor among many others.

Though im sure to you that will read that It was the over-riding, deciding, and major factor in the bulls problems, and though nobody said that, they really did because they used other words.

If the RFL wasn’t relentless in helping member clubs I would worry. If it wasn’t, why would it exist. There is absolutely no issue with this “We have paid market value for the stadium and the Bulls will pay market-value rental to the RFL to play their home fixtures at Odsal.” In fact this is a wonderful thing for the game. Money which Bradford would likely have had to pay to an external party now goes back in to the game and be reinvested. Frankly if the RFL could afford to do this with all clubs who rent their ground, it would be fantastic for the game,

Once again you what fail to understand, probably because all you are doing is trying to kick Bradford whilst they are down, is that getting a B licence is not, and never will be, and was never supposed to be a guarantee of financial probity. It was a judgement on all the things that make up a club. Not just that one single thing.

The fact you highlight the 24th of Jan as when Bradfords problems became apparent, as if there was something that could have been done at that point is hilarious. Kicking Bradford out at that point would have not only killed that club but hugely affected not only the SL competition, but also every club in there would, on the eve of the season, when all budgets had been done, had to deal with 1 less home game as well as the likely cancellation of the Magic Weekend which makes clubs some decent money.

Had Bradford been swapped for Fax or Fev, that club would likely have been bankrupted too. They would have no time to sign anyone, no time to get in sponsors, season tickets already sold for the championship. It would have been hugely damaging to them.

You then try to conflate what the RFL are doing to help Bradford (or more accurately, did do to help previous owners of Bradford) to denigrate what not the next owners are doing, but the owners after that. This current ownership of Bradford are free to run their club as they see fit, they aren’t either Peter Hood, or Omar Kahn, they aren’t to blame for whatever mistakes Peter Hood and Omar Kahn made. The fact you want to treat Bradford Bulls as some continuous Homogenous entity where the sons are punished for the sins of the father simply highlights that A) you are an idiot, and B) your opinion isn’t formed on a conclusion borne from an analysis of the facts, but because you are sad person who finds joy and happiness and the suffering of fans of a rival club. That I pity.

You may wish to pretend that it was obvious Bradford were going to go bust, you may wish to pretend it was easy to see. It wasn’t, it never is. Clubs run on a tiny turnover where a fairly small change can make a huge difference to sustainability. The Facts are that there are a good 7 or 8 clubs in SL who, if circumstances conspired, would have been the ones in Bradfords position. Huddersfield would have been far more precarious, they are fortunate that they can be Ken Davy’s plaything.

I can see now why several posters have highlighted your stupidity.

1.You are happy with the RFL helping the Bulls while not helping others. That is not their role as a sport governing body.

2. The licensing process involved a detailed financial check. The Bulls given a green light in July 2011 yet getting advances in Sept / Oct then selling ground in Jan then needing 1m in March shows the RFL checks were a shambles.

3. You clearly have a reading difficulty. I did not say the problems became apparent in January. The difficulties culminated in the sale of the ground in January. They were apparent far earlier. Try reading what has been written before jumping in then you will not look as foolish.

3. I have never suggested that the Bulls swap with fax or fev so you are tilting at windmills.

4. Your infantile ramblings about conflation suggest to me that you are a tad vexed, oh dear, what a shame.

5. Your suggestion that my comments are anti bulls are groundless and once again infantile. Once again try reading what I actually write rather than respond to the 'voices in your head'. My OP was about the RFL and several times since I have said that the fans and staff at the Bulls have been shafted, so get a grip.

Without Davy the Giants would not be in SL. He puts his money into a club. That is his private choice. This is not the same as a Governing body pumping the games money into a club. You simply do not understand the difference.

The RFL have been a shambles, live with it.

Is there a point in there, somewhere, struggling to get out? Are you saying that whatever enquiries KPMG made were negligent, and you know better, so if you had done it, you would have known that one year on the bulls would go bust?

Shame the RFL didn't just ask you, then, instead of using the resources of someone like KPMG.

I would like the RFL to help all clubs as best they can. Like they helped Bradford, Like they helped Rochdale, Like they helped Keighley, Like they helped Huddersfield when they merged Sheffield. That is exactly the role a governing body should play. If they don’t we can scrap the governing body and simply have a receptionist doing the admin, and ref to handle disciplinary.

No it doesn’t. You would need to be an absolute moron to think so. Especially when it has already been explained to you why this is the case.

Regardless the RFL did not do the financial checks, they worked off reports prepared by KPMG. If you have an issue here with anyone, its KPMG. Take it up with them. It would be funny to see how quickly they chewed you up and spat you out.

No they weren’t. You invented the fact that these issues became apparent in September the previous year and were only finalised in January

Yet you have said that keeping Bradford in and giving them the help that was given was a mistake. When judging if this was a mistake or not. Only a moron would not consider the alternatives.

The fact you couldn’t address those ‘ramblings’ suggest to me they were bang on the money. Again, That I pity.

The anger in the post suggests you are a tad vexed at being shown up for what you are. Oh dear, What a shame.

Yet Huddersfield had a million pounds of the games money pumped in to them to help with their difficulties post-merger. Ken Davy readily accepted that money. I hope he has paid it back to ‘the game’ lest he make you look like a massive idiotic hypocrite. What a shame that would be.

We agree on one thing - I have no idea who Awford is.

Whilst the Bulls were holding Orfords registration they had the ability to negotiate. They gave that away for nothing.
What you are say is that the Bulls paid Orford severance pay for him breaking his contract. That I seriously doubt. I would put it to you that the Bulls stopped paying their marque halfback as it started to become clear he had no intention of returning and the monies referred are infact salary payments which were withheld - that's how it reads to me and that would be appropriate for the situation the Bulls found themselves in.

Onto the fault of recruitment/youth:
At that time the Bulls had recruitment policy of big name, big expense signings such as Orford in preference over blooding their own talent. That policy had to have been defined somewhere by someone. Bulls have lost some great local talent by pushing Aussies infront of their fans to the detriment of the long term development of a production line. Im not saying the Bulls are alone on this front. as the old adage implies, Bulls bought in Fish rather than the Fishing Rod. But as is now apparent, there wasnt a long term plan.

Well he lists 6 but in any case he didn't say Bradford have only produced the above mentioned players. Of the young lads coming from the junior set-up, those are the highest profile people to move on.

But in any case we were losing young uns even when we were doing ok. I can think of Chris Bridge, Ryan Atkins etc off the top of my head as fairly young lads that have moved on and done good. And now Warrington are being kind enough to lend us back some of theirs in our hours of need.

I like how you've deliberately conflated Grade B and the finances. The financial element of the licencing process was only one part of it. The report even noted that there were some challenges, but the club, overall, was a B based on that, as one of a number of criteria.

The licencing process overall was not a financial audit, nor anything like a financial audit. It was an assessment of who were the 14 best clubs based on a bunch of criteria. Even with financial challenges, few doubted then that the Bulls were one of the top 14 - or, indeed, the top 10. Hell, I'd probably still make that analysis today given the dross and drivel, to borrow a phrase, cluttering up the bottom of the league.

Whitcuts office has been cleared out and they found these.....

...explains a lot!