No. My money isn't worth more than his. The difference is though that I will still be going to watch my team through the bad times as well as the good. Where are all Bradford's "Bullmania" fans now. Those who are still with them are the true supporters who are willing to pay the market rate as opposed to those who were only interested when they could get a season ticket for £50.

One thing that might come up in a high court is if the RFL have unfair terms & conditions relating to the rules of the sport.
Whether that be how punishments are meted out or even any regulations regarding exclusion from the sport altogether.
IF Bradford are relegated and it subsequently IS found to be unjust (as opposed to just playing e and not getting enough points anyway) a high court may well say that any rule with regard to a club not being allowed to seek compensation due to unfair conditions and/or negligence on the part of the RFL isn't enforceable.

But by being a member club they are surely deemed to have accepted those conditions and as such can't start complaining when the said rules are applied to them.

You mean rules that are basically forced upon you or you get the option of leaving..that hardly seems fair does it. Bringing rules about that actually force your hand are not ALWAYS fair/just or even legal.
In many walks of life there are unfair conditions/terms applied that people accept but it doesn't make it right, it should never ever mean that just because you 'accepted' them that they are legally enforceable.
For all clubs it's a case of follow the rules we put in place or you no longer have a place in RL, it's similar everywhere, tenancy agreements, employer T&Cs, many sporting organisations have being found to be running rules that were legally unenforceable but member clubs 'accepted' them until the time came that it seemed it was time to stand up and say, actually no this is wrong.
I think that IF Bradford have found some terms to be unfair for the deduction of points/punishments or their application of such, inclusion of a club in the competition (as per the rule stated previously) or any other aspect relating to this affair then the RFL could be over a barrel and the game as a whole blown wide apart.
It's the RFL's inability to make the rules watertight both in respect to being black & white (points punishments for one) and legally binding that will bring the game down IMO.

Well I suppose that proves there's a first time for everything.

Where are all Bradfords "bullmania" fans? Well they are there and happy to support a decent team. In fact there are more Bradford fans now, than there are Halifax supporters. There are even more fans attending at Bradford now than attended fax in SL.

Those fans are still there, have proven they are still there and proven they would come back if only the club were given the time and space to grow again.

I would professional opinion carries the most weight here. Not that it will matter because Bradford won't finish within 6 of us!



"Generally, as long as a sport's regulator acts in accordance with its own rules and regulations, then a court is unlikely to interfere, usually taking the view that the specialist body is in a much stronger position to make an appropriate decision based on its expert knowledge of the sport.

"A court might, in extreme circumstances, rule that a penalty imposed is excessive or disproportionate.

"But in previous cases there has always been a wide discretion afforded to the sports governing body in making that decision.'"

]

I cant see the rfl inventing punishments

What "i guess" is possible, is that bradford "under licencing" and playing in a gentlemans club known as Superleague Europe ltd thought these rules didn't or shouldn't apply to them,which they probably didnt last season.

Unfortunately for them things have changed and the rfl rules now appear to cover all leagues

I was at thrum hall in the 80's when your and mine clubs were two of the best in the world, I was also there in the 90's when were playing in front of 500 people. Hardly a blow in! Had lots of fun with fans at barrow, fax, feath etc during our time in div 2&3 but wouldn't want to be back there.

Well it is arguable if it is a good idea to kick out a club who have the evidenced potential to deliver major pluses for your business, especially when there is no one to replace them who could offer more. South Sydney are a great example, terrible run club, kicked out, managed to argue there way back in, now the second biggest club in the NRL.

Of course it's previous owners of the bulls poor management that has got them in this situation but I simply don't understand punishing a club that is on its knees financially by financially hitting them harder. No business in the world would do something that stupid.

The Bulls are not being ' kicked out ' ,they are playing within the rules of the sport just like everybody else

They are being punished because they took actions that attempted to gain an advantage against their fellow clubs, nothing unfair about that ,their actions also brought the sport into disrepute

They are not the ' Victim ' in all this, everybody else they competed with or dealt financially are

The sport overall will be better that they take their points deduction and deal with whatever consequences that brings , their refusal to do that in a honorable way further damages the image of the sport

It really is that simple

Its never stopped you before, spread enough talking bollox and you can confuse any argument, you're slipping

Spot on.

Every other club that has cheated in this way resulting in going bust has accepted the rules and the consequent points deduction, resulting in relegation at the end of the ensuing season for many.

I worry that the Bulls' new owner isn't of an RL background and more importantly isn't willing to accept the spirit of the competition.

It's suggested his own money is funding his appeals. But what if it's his cash going via the Bulls club as a loan and he then gets his money back out of the Bulls' parachute payment for 2015? A third Administation in 3 years?

That is my worry. Some would say a court hearing started this decline, a drop to the next division is not the end at all. But a 3rd administration through another court case could do the job.

If that made sense as a sentence it could almost have been confused for wit.

How do you know either of those statements are true?