The owners who wanted Admin were Glover and Elston not Carter!
Carter made the statement about Admin probably costing Wakefield their licence in pre season and before any players were sold so it wasn't a statement made as a reaction to Bradford's appeal. Why would he make that statement when he did (preseason) if it weren't true, it didn't serve any purpose other than to explain to Wakefield fans why drastic cuts were being made.

No you're right on that one but going into Administration is punished by a 6 point deduction!

Steve O'Conner accepted the penalty when he took over from Tony Chambers at Widnes
Geoff Moss and Ian Roberts accepted it when they took over from Leighton Samuel at Crusaders
Andrew Glover accepted it when he took over from Ted Richardson at Wakefield

But Marc a green wants Bradford to be treated differently and seeks a zero punishment for Bradford's Administration despite the above precedents for both punishment and taking responsibility for the way the club was run prior to taking ownership.

It's madness and delusion to to expect the creditors to get shafted and the Rugby League doing the shafting to walk away unpunished.

Carter hasn't backtracked - he has been consistent in his assertions.

He has always said there should be a deterrent and a penalty for going into admin.

The people who think there shouldn't be is Bulls. They want no penalty...clearly the previous penalty they received was not enough to deter them from running the business so badly for a second time in two years.

Having been told the club would not be supported by the RFL should Wakey go into admin, he then chose to put his home on the line to keep the club going. What did Bulls do?

Bleating about the penalty AFTER buying club and knowing the penalty was there is just further evidence of the way Bulls think they are above and beyond not only the letter of the rules, but the spirit of them also.

Because it reflects well on him and taps into the victim mentality present at Wakefield.

Btw I'm not saying it isn't true, simply presented in the most favourable terms to him.

Where is the deterrent to Omar Kahn putting the bulls into admin by deducting Marc Greens club points? It has no effect on Omar Kahn at all.

I want a deterrent. I want a punishment and rules that work. Deducting the new bulls points for what the old bulls did is neither of those.

It isn't a deterrent because it punishes clearly the wrong people. If anything we should be giving more help to people like Carter and Green, they are putting their money in to try and rectify the mess someone else made of one of our clubs

Just a point. Neither OK Bulls, BB2014 nor any other company have been docked points by the RFL.

The sports club playing as Bradford Bulls in Super League has been docked points. Who owns the club or company is irrelevant in this context.

Khan didn't put the Bulls into admin...Green did.

Green has benefitted massively by taking full ownership of the club, debt-free.

The sports club Bradford bulls only exist as a playing entity of the company who owns the golden share and as such membership of the RFL and SL. Who owns the club is not irrelevant. Who owns the club IS the Bradford bulls. 'The club' is the company which holds that share, it doesn't exist outside of it.

The member of the RFL at Leeds is leeds CF&A ltd, trading as Leeds Rhinos rugby football league club. Under the RFL's articles of association leeds rhinos RLFC do not exist outside Leeds CF&A ltd.

The RFLs articles define a club as "any rugby league club which is admitted by the Council as a member of the Company from time to time in accordance with these Articles; " the member is the company holding the share. The points deduction by virtue of being levied against the club, is levied against the member, in this case Bradford Bulls Northern ltd, for the actions of OK Bulls ltd in going in to admin, and against BB2014 ltd for their actions coming out.

Omar Kahn was in control of the club when it was put into admin, Marc Green was a creditor and not under the jurisdiction of the RFL. The RFL cannot punish someone not under their jurisdiction.

If you do want to be that picky , technically it was the court who put the company into administration and the administrator who agreed the payment to creditors. By your logic it's The judge and administrator we should be deducting points from.

Wasn't there a winding up order served on the Bulls by the HMRC, isn't it the truth that Administration was sought to protect the club from being wound up, once in Administration all the creditors are then under that process.

Hardly 'Force Majure' is it?
If you don't pay your tax bill you don't need to be Nostradamus to see what's coming!

So the sports club exists then? And can be transferred from one company to another.
When whichever company owns the sports club now bought it, they also bought any punishments due to the club. In the same way as if a Bradford player had received a ban before the club changed ownership that ban would still be current under the new owners.

It's frankly ridiculous to suggest any punishments the club receives for breaking the rules should be annulled simply because it changes ownership. Either it's new club or it isn't. If it's a new club then they can apply for a place in C1. If it's not then any punishment the club received previously applied to the club now.

Smokey, your defence of Bradford is all very laudable, however, I’ve yet to see your answer to the problem.

Say club “A” assembles a squad at a cost of £1.4M & the said club finishes twelfth in the league, but as soon as the income streams dry up, when the season ends, the club goes into administration.

Whereas club “B” has a squad costing £1M which finishes thirteenth & is relegated.

Are you of the opinion that club “A” Mk II should receive no points deduction for the following year?

If so, what’s to stop club “A” Mk III, IV, V etc., doing the same thing year after year?

Maybe you believe the owner/s of club “A” (which has gone to the wall) should be penalised financially, wouldn’t there be a slight problem, as the cupboard would be bare?

Green put the Bulls in admin as a Debenture holder. He is now directly benefitting from completely owning a debt-free Bulls.

The RFL aren't punishing "someone", they are punishing the Bulls...something you want to pretend isn't happening.

It's not picky. It's facts. And it's fair.

I don't koow if you're suggesting this was his plan, but his explanation is that admin was to protect the Bulls, as if he hadn't done so HMRC's winding up petition would have resulted in liquidation. At the time he did this Marc Green wasn't even a bidder for the Bulls and even after the original group (Moore/Calvert/Watt) pulled out he wasn't the first choice of the administrator (Lamb), so if his aim was to take over a debt free bulls it does seem a very convoluted and tricky way to do it.
Btw he's now directly "benefiting" by putting in more of his money to cover any deficit, and indeed had to provide proof to the RFL of funds to get to the season end, on a club that has little or no assets.

I wouldn't have thought that was his plan...seems a lot of uncontrollables in there.

The point made is in response to Smokey, who says Bulls don't exist and it is the people who put Bulls into admin that should be punished, not the new owners.

Well, by quirk of fate, the person who put Bulls into admin and the new owner, is one and the same - Green.

Of course, the real point is, it doesn't who owns them at any point in time - the member club (which really does exist), went into admin and it is the member club which should be penalised.