You will not find a single post by me saying the bulls owners were not to blame for the internal failings of the club. So try not to misrepresent what I have written.

The RFL do have a role impartially running the game and applying their own rules. On this they have failed miserably.

So you cannot name another case where a club had a £1m bail out...as I thought. Three mis managed clubs get bailouts. But other clubs do not get ground buying bailouts (such as wakefield). Perhaps the RFL executive should not prefer some clubs over others while spending the games money?

Why are you obsessed with the lease? That was a method of assisting Bradford in a time of need. Why would the RFL take exactly the same action in different cases? They have assisted other clubs in various ways. Why are you so against the RFL helping out Bradford?

So what checks do they make? Do you know?

Are you just ignoring the issue about signing players now?

I never said you are not shouldering the blame with the owners, there is no misrepresentation. What I am saying is there is no one else to shoulder the blame, not the fans, not the players, and not the rfl.

You keep saying the rfl have acted against their own rules/ poorly/ whatever during this fiasco. But on each occasion you have given your opinion, myself, and others, have given counter arguments and examples, and given counter questions, which you have chosen to ignore, and simple reiterated, the rfl have conducted themselves poorly - how so? Either show how my responses were wrong, or concede said points and bring more points in.

The rfl are guilty are a great many things, but they can't be accused of anything with regard how they have handled this ongoing saga

Who owned the lease of odsal at the start of this ongoing saga and who own it now? Only asking because I can't think of any other SL club that needed that level of non-assistance!

I genuinely have no idea! Tbh I'd imagine most documents like that will be held by holding company's etc, which even with clubs in trouble are financially secure - the difference between Bradford and other situations is it appears the entire ship was going down , holding company's and all, hence assets like the lease became "available" for purchase. At least to my understanding of the situation

I'm gonna have a look into who actually owns what now :p

Quote: gutterfax "Who owned the lease of odsal at the start of this ongoing saga and who own it now? Only asking because I can't think of any other SL club that needed that level of non-assistance!'" Strange, I actually can't find ANYTHING on the financial state of the bulls before 2012 - I'm only on my iPad tonight, and will use bloomberg tomorrow to get some more detail, but he's what I have as a brief breakdown of the story so far: Date Chairman Owner Action Source Jan 12 Hood ??? Sold odsal to rfl to "secure immediate finances" www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/16709752 March 12 Hood Announces financial difficulties to the tune of 1m www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/17521786 June 12 Hood Bradford enter administration to the tune of 1.5m www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/18554519 Aug 12 Whitcut? Kahn Kahn buys the club "securing financial future" www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/19446070 July 13 Whitcut? Kahn Bradford players not paid due to "administrative error" www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... y_Tuesday/ Aug 13 Whitcut? Kahn Kahn injects 900k into club to pay wages www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... pay_wages/ Sep 13 Moore Kahn "steps down" as chairman, "sells" to moore www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... ip/?ref=rc Sep 13 R paul Moore Robbie paul appointed CEO www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/24283813 Oct 13 R paul Moore Whitcut fails fit and proper person test and leaves www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... s/?ref=rss Nov 13 R paul Moore New financial holes found - Moore "not paying a penny of kahns loans www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... urvive___/ Dec 13 R paul Kahn? Moore and co leave bulls after kahn refuses to transfer shares www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... _the_club/ I don't believe I've missed anything major? With regards the stadium - Bradford owned it (along with whoever owned the bulls before kahn ... Who that is I don't know) they OFFERED the stadium to the rfl, who agreed a price, and seems the very start of the financial story

Quote: gutterfax "Who owned the lease of odsal at the start of this ongoing saga and who own it now? Only asking because I can't think of any other SL club that needed that level of non-assistance!'" Strange, I actually can't find ANYTHING on the financial state of the bulls before 2012 - I'm only on my iPad tonight, and will use bloomberg tomorrow to get some more detail, but he's what I have as a brief breakdown of the story so far: Date Chairman Owner Action Source Jan 12 Hood ??? Sold odsal to rfl to "secure immediate finances" www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/16709752 March 12 Hood Announces financial difficulties to the tune of 1m www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/17521786 June 12 Hood Bradford enter administration to the tune of 1.5m www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/18554519 Aug 12 Whitcut? Kahn Kahn buys the club "securing financial future" www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/19446070 July 13 Whitcut? Kahn Bradford players not paid due to "administrative error" www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... y_Tuesday/ Aug 13 Whitcut? Kahn Kahn injects 900k into club to pay wages www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... pay_wages/ Sep 13 Moore Kahn "steps down" as chairman, "sells" to moore www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... ip/?ref=rc Sep 13 R paul Moore Robbie paul appointed CEO www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/24283813 Oct 13 R paul Moore Whitcut fails fit and proper person test and leaves www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... s/?ref=rss Nov 13 R paul Moore New financial holes found - Moore "not paying a penny of kahns loans www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... urvive___/ Dec 13 R paul Kahn? Moore and co leave bulls after kahn refuses to transfer shares www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... _the_club/ I don't believe I've missed anything major? With regards the stadium - Bradford owned it (along with whoever owned the bulls before kahn ... Who that is I don't know) they OFFERED the stadium to the rfl, who agreed a price, and seems the very start of the financial story

Cripesginger: Why do you keep avoiding direct questions, saying the same thing, then thinking you have somehow "helped" ?

Bradford are in a unique situation with the lease hence the constant use of it as an example. I can't name another club in a similar position. I'm sure Andy or some other bulls expert can explain it better.

The ground is actually owned by the council. The lease is something else. A very long lease with I think some covenants in place about usage. Buying the lease was actually the best deal for the rfl. If they had not taken the lease then the loan made to the bulls would have been lost along with all the other creditors monies and the fans money in the administration. The lease means the rfl have an asset that even if the bulls died entirely could still generate income through speedway or some other enterprise. But it is more than likely to make a return on the lease in the lloby term. ( this being long term over a period of decades). Not to mention it has a resale value.

Taking saints as an example the rfl could not buy the lease for £1 million even if we needed the help so when other examples of rfl purchases were given you see he ignored this as it was not precisely the same figure.

The point about buying players. Well the rfl approved saints buying Amor and our losses are massive far beyond Bradford and have been for a decade. It's a pure lack of understanding of financial checks and the purpose. Financial checks do not guarantee solvancy. Just that a club could operate.

If I say the business will generate £3 millions. We will spend £3.5 and plan to increase revenue by x y and z. I also have about £2 million ofmy oan capital. That seems decent. If once approved we only generate £2.5 millions and spend £4 millions which I cover with various loans or I walk away there is jack the rfl can do to stop me even if they knew. Which they wouldn't.

Similar lease scenario at the Cougars.

My understanding is the Co-Op own the ground and the RFL hold the lease from the last time the Cougars went down the pan.

The way it works is that the RFL pay the lease so the cougars can play at the ground and the money is taken from the central pool fund that is paid to the club.


As usual the Cougars lead and the Bulls follow

Who owns Belle Vue? My understanding was that Wakefield had no assets of any significance (certainly not a valuable long leasehold) which the RFL could pick up. At the Bulls, securing the lease of the ground made good financial sense. Of course, absent any assets on which to secure their money, the RFL consistently offers clubs like Wakefield, who have perpetual cashflow crises, advances on the clubs' Sky cash.

You basically appear to be asking that Wakefield be just given money for nothing - are they a unique special case?

My understanding is that the Wakefield Wildcats still own their own ground. Which is maybe why when they went into administration they had to be treated differently to the Bulls.

The Bulls had no significant assets other than the lease which they sold prior to administration.

(The assumption that Wakey own some or all of their ground seems to be wrong)

Cripesginger is proposing that Wakefield's lease should have been bought by the RFL for £1 million same as the Bull's.

Which shows the futility of say the same solution should be offered to all clubs in all circumstances.

Wakefield don't own Belle Vue.....“It’s early days though, Wildcats are on a rolling contract in leasing Belle Vue I believe so we have to wait to see the outcome of the new stadium and take things from there.” Think the ground was sold in the 1980s to Wakefield Metropolitan District Council to prevent the club going bankrupt back then. www.wakefieldexpress.co.uk/sport ... -1-4023481 The potential of the club is promising however with a healthy 8,500 average crowd attendance which could grow with the correct running of the club now. It's also the only professional sports club in the City of Wakefield and one of the oldest rugby clubs in the sport dating back to 1873.

Wakefield don't own Belle Vue.....“It’s early days though, Wildcats are on a rolling contract in leasing Belle Vue I believe so we have to wait to see the outcome of the new stadium and take things from there.” Think the ground was sold in the 1980s to Wakefield Metropolitan District Council to prevent the club going bankrupt back then. www.wakefieldexpress.co.uk/sport ... -1-4023481 The potential of the club is promising however with a healthy 8,500 average crowd attendance which could grow with the correct running of the club now. It's also the only professional sports club in the City of Wakefield and one of the oldest rugby clubs in the sport dating back to 1873.