You are having a go at the wrong people Kosh.
The people that you should be angry with are the folk that have badly overspent at Bradford.
You make comment that none of the Bulls suppliers have laid off staff because of the Bulls difficulties, but the level of debt that they have, cannot fail to damage their suppliers and it is very likely that some will suffer severe hardship as a result of this.

So apparently it's down to two bidders: Omar Khan and Bradford Park Avenue. Is history about to go full circle and the Great Split of 1907 be healed?

So the question is

What exactly does a club need to do , to get its licence revoked ?

Change it's name to Salford or Castleford ?

You're probably right.
The league is made up of "haves" and "have nots" and even when the haves have nothing the still dont become have nots, which does make you wonder why all the clubs have to go through the charade of franchise applications

The latter would pretty much ensure the former. Which was my point.


I have zero interest in what happens in Soccer and fail to see the relevance TBH. I'd also point out that for a Soccer player, being out of work for a few months would hardly trigger a financial crisis.


The RFL did, however, assist the Crusaders players in finding new employment.

I'm also unconvinced by the argument that just because something was done one way once, it should always be done that way. Surely the idea is to get better at handling these situations?


I've never said anything of the sort and neither do I believe it. If Bradford [ido[/i fail, despite all efforts being made to avoid that happening, then so be it. I simply feel that all efforts [ishould[/i be made - whatever the club involved.

It's perfectly possible for me to be angry at several different people at the same time. Quite common, even.

I'll say this again - what's the point of punishing folk who had nothing to do with the Bulls current situation when the folk responsible are no longer there? It's not even a deterrent.

Actually they said they COULD revoke the license. Not WOULD. and thats the way the rules are worded too. They now allow the sanction of removing the license but it isnt mandatory. Subtle but important distinction.

Also, define "failing club" - if it was simply "going into administration" (even if it's because you collected income tax from your employees and VAT from your customers then treating the money as your own and spending it, so when HMRC asked for its money there was none there) there'd be no need for a separate punishment. In the form of a points deduction for going into administration ...

I would instantly ask the club why they are underselling their product. I would ask the same question of the Huddersfield Club also. Where is charging £80 for a season ticket going to lead to? Especially when it becomes the norm. How can a SL club ever go back to £180 after that? I would expect a Championship club to do this with the knowledge that IF they ever got a license they could justifyably ramp up the prices. What would happen to Hudderfield's fan base if they started charging proper prices for their product?

I'm not saying that this means that clubs are failing. I'm not saying that Salford's constant bagging of their own attendances isn't a cry for help. I think people need to understand that SL licensing doesn't guarantee successful clubs - it is merely a choice of the best 14 clubs at that the time of granting it. That said, I think the RFL will have a job on selling the virtues of a license application process the next time round.

You are correct, the word is "could". However the point remains, under what circumstances would they actually revoke a license ?
It is difficult to imagine haw a club could fail to a greater extent in terms of financial viability !

Nope. What I'm saying is that all efforts should be made to ensure that the players and staff of the Bulls don't suffer more than can be avoided, and this should take priority over any other considerations.


Nope. They said that they [icould[/i revoke licences. Not [iwould[/i. Quite an important difference.


No idea. And irrelevant to my point.


What eventually happens with the size and make-up of SL is also irrelevant to whether the Bulls survive as a club. I'm completely ambivalent about whether this is in SL or the Championship - I just don't want the club to fold and people to lose their jobs.

They might as well replace 'could' with 'never'. It is clear that no SL team will ever have their license terminated. It's not even a remote possibility.

Why punish innocent people ?Sorry,emotional blackmail that old chestnut.So we don't imprison criminals because it wouldn't be fair on the family who did nothing wrong?