Wow!
What a condescending a-hole you just showed yourself to be, Sunshine!

The Bulls have entered Administration
The rules state that a 6pt penalty is applicable so should they be punished like other clubs have in very very similar situations YES!
Thought so

Everyone who ever enters Administration can sing a sob story of how it's not their fault, someone else was to blame and theirs was a unique situation not like any other.

I'm not concerned with Omar Khans plight or that of past and present Directors, its irrelelevant. What concerns me is that the governing body for Rugby League acts with integrity rather than duplicity, that they're transparent in their actions concerning Bradford rather than the fork tongued double dealing cloak and dagger secret loans and trumped up stories of predatory developers etc etc.

You can spin and whine and plead Bradford as a special case all you want but they've entered Administration and should be punished like everyone else, shouldn't they...Thought So.

Not sure what that attack on the RFL (justified or not) has to do with my post, though? But at least you are engaging in reasoned debate so no issues with that.

Just a couple of clarifications, though. Whilst I am no fan of Khan - he and I had some significant ftf disagreemnents - he WAS ill. He DID have to go into hospital. He WAS told he'd better stand back or he might be lying down...for ever. It was not a contrivance, it was actually the truth.

The three current guys (remember to add Robbie Paul in as a director now too) were sponsors and/or big fans well before they got more specifically involved. They were not "brought to the club by WHitcu*t" in the way I think you are suggesting. The club was actually looking for external investors to come on board. I know a bit about this, because I was involved representing one of those - the Supporters Trust. These guys were the three that followed through.

As for "causing parents to persuade their children in other directions", I gather the Braford Bulls Foundation took 53,000 local childeren through its numerous programmes last year. Yes, you heard it right. That is more kids than the total population of some RL towns. I think it is initiatives like that that are more likely to make a difference to the parents, than any spats about ownership and administration that are likely to be of interest to a small minority?

The penalty is "up to six points".

The actual penalty would seem to depend on the extent to which the creditors are paid, and an unfair advantage is not thereby gained.

Next?

I believe it was Hood who negotiated the salaries on signings, not McNamara.

Hence, I suggest, some of the crazy deals?

And the precedent set for entering Administration has been 6pts reduced to 4pts if creditors are repaid.

Will the clubs have to vote Bulls back into Superleague. I thought this had to be done. I thought when we came back they did and also when Bulls went pop last.

For 2014 you signed:

George

Ferguson

Gaskell

Carvell

Henry

Blythe given a contract following a loan deal

Plus enhanced some young player contracts and extended several others.

All together that is a lot of committed expenditure by a club that soon went into administration.

Compare your ins and outs with the Broncos who have not gone into admin.

I'd say 4. It's easy to mistake important for the team and high wages.

The biggest problem Bradford have with this argument is that they've made several high profile signings in that time as well. Ultimately, would you say that Bradford spend the least on players in the league? Rather, if you were to rank financial position and player salary spend, would Bradford fall in similar positions? Personally I don't think they do.

Every team goes financial difficulties, so I don't believe there needs to be a witch hunt, but the important thing that this is addressed so it doesn't happen again. Though that was said the first time so it's very hard to accept. It's gotten to a point where by unless obvious and very clear attempts to live within their means I'm going to be skeptical towards any sort of stability and Bradford being in the same sentence.

That doesn't mean there shouldn't be consequences of going into administration regardless of situation. 6 points is the standard and so it should be, reduced if the debt is then paid off. There's no need for excuses by Bradford fans. Time to get on with it.

Adey, it is a very ambiguous statement by the club that it "intends to work with creditors" which is not necessarily the same thing as paying them everything that is owed. If the intention was to honour all debts then surely they would have said so ? Certainly in respect of HMRC the new business will not be able to pay the old company's liability so I assume the taxpayer loses out again ?

Oh I agree and I wouldn't complain if we had a points deduction. Just tryin to make a point that money has been cut, and this admin is different to the last one in that sounds like it was a way to push through the transfer of ownership.

On the outside looking in, I question just how much has been cut. When compared to other clubs who have been in similar situations (from figures I've seen about Bradford and other clubs) Bradford do appear to have come off lightly. I know a lot of backroom have apparently gone in Bradford, but considering playing squads, you've got rid of a few (as you said) but also signed a few (as others have said) and I question whether the books are truly balanced (it could be that they are, and other clubs have just used it as an excuse to make even deeper cuts)

As for forcing the deal through, I'm not convinced at all by that, but should we see an era of stability, living within ones means and some semblance of trust rebuilt, I'm willing to say the means justify the end. But there are ramifications for that.

You will perhaps note that I have sought to avoid saying anywhere that the club has said it will PAY all the creditors. That has meant some interesting word constructs at times! Because yes, I am sure the club's wording is quite deliberate. Although my verbal understanding is that this is the intent. But I suspect they will not be keen on settling any creditors that seem questionable or may be unrelated to the club's rugby activities. Within reason, I would be at ease with that since it would be what I would do in their position.

I can't see any reason why Newco and HMRC cannot agree a voluntary settlement of the b/f liability? If they do not, and the club WAS to take the taxpayer for a sum, I would be beyond pis sed off. I have not heard any suggestion (so far, at least) that that might be on the cards though, and indeed I cannot ses the RFL allowing it.

Outsiders looking in will understandably not be aware of the finer nuances of all that has been going on, or some of the hearsay and allegations that have been floating around. And remember that a key protaganist in all this is the local MP, a former director who seems to have gone to ground, and various local politicians and quangocrats who were directors or involved, all from the same political party too. The trouble is, you really need to be aware of all this to fully understand some of the feelings about it all. Doubtless just the same as has happened in other cases, and indeed how it was last time with the Bulls.

It really is far from black and white, and the issues extend a fair bit beyond the rugby. I'd really ask folk to keep a BIT more of an open mind at this stage.

Is there any way I can read a poster's history?

I'm almost certain whenever you mention Bradford you always, always add something about the RFL and the Odsal lease.

Valid points aside, it does make me chuckle a little how you always seem to crowbar it in somewhere!

They said in November they had to cut £400k to balance the books from the totally unrealistic budgets they inherited. I believe the real number proved to be rather more than that too.

They HAVE got rid of a lot of people - they left on 12/1 - and cut the hours of others. At all levels too, and flesh not fat. The effect on the coaching and football staff has been prety severe. Go up there mid-evening and you will see the impact on thjpose who are left. I have been to evening meetings there recently, and I can assure you there are folk working above and beyond to keep the place going.

They have done everything to save cutting the first team playing squad, but the cuts - and including ones they will still have to make if they cannot resolve issues - may do very real damage to the future of the club. The one that worries more than a few of us the most is that they may have to close the Tong training centre, which is one of the few jewels in the crown that helps the club compete against clubs with nore money and resources. If that goes, I think the club's future is fekked, tbh. As do quite a few more of us. Unlike so many others, some of us are actually trying to do something about that.